CVE-2025-40090
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ksmbd: fix recursive locking in RPC handle list access Since commit 305853cce3794 ("ksmbd: Fix race condition in RPC handle list access"), ksmbd_session_rpc_method() attempts to lock sess->rpc_lock. This causes hung connections / tasks when a client attempts to open a named pipe. Using Samba's rpcclient tool: $ rpcclient //192.168.1.254 -U user%password $ rpcclient $> srvinfo <connection hung here> Kernel side: "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message. task:kworker/0:0 state:D stack:0 pid:5021 tgid:5021 ppid:2 flags:0x00200000 Workqueue: ksmbd-io handle_ksmbd_work Call trace: __schedule from schedule+0x3c/0x58 schedule from schedule_preempt_disabled+0xc/0x10 schedule_preempt_disabled from rwsem_down_read_slowpath+0x1b0/0x1d8 rwsem_down_read_slowpath from down_read+0x28/0x30 down_read from ksmbd_session_rpc_method+0x18/0x3c ksmbd_session_rpc_method from ksmbd_rpc_open+0x34/0x68 ksmbd_rpc_open from ksmbd_session_rpc_open+0x194/0x228 ksmbd_session_rpc_open from create_smb2_pipe+0x8c/0x2c8 create_smb2_pipe from smb2_open+0x10c/0x27ac smb2_open from handle_ksmbd_work+0x238/0x3dc handle_ksmbd_work from process_scheduled_works+0x160/0x25c process_scheduled_works from worker_thread+0x16c/0x1e8 worker_thread from kthread+0xa8/0xb8 kthread from ret_from_fork+0x14/0x38 Exception stack(0x8529ffb0 to 0x8529fff8) The task deadlocks because the lock is already held: ksmbd_session_rpc_open down_write(&sess->rpc_lock) ksmbd_rpc_open ksmbd_session_rpc_method down_read(&sess->rpc_lock) <-- deadlock Adjust ksmbd_session_rpc_method() callers to take the lock when necessary.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 6.12.53, < 6.12.55>= 6.17.3, < 6.17.5= 6.18CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped6.12.556.17.5
6.12.55, 6.17.5, or 6.19+ (depending on which branch you are on)
- Identify the current kernel version using `uname -r`
- Check which affected version range your kernel falls into (>= 6.12.53 && < 6.12.55, >= 6.17.3 && < 6.17.5, or 6.18)
- Update the Linux kernel to version 6.12.55 or later if on the 6.12.x branch
- Update the Linux kernel to version 6.17.5 or later if on the 6.17.x branch
- Update to kernel 6.19 or later if on the 6.18.x branch
- Reboot the system to load the new kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version with `uname -r`
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-40090 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-40090 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data