CVE-2025-71087
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: iavf: fix off-by-one issues in iavf_config_rss_reg() There are off-by-one bugs when configuring RSS hash key and lookup table, causing out-of-bounds reads to memory [1] and out-of-bounds writes to device registers. Before commit 43a3d9ba34c9 ("i40evf: Allow PF driver to configure RSS"), the loop upper bounds were: i <= I40E_VFQF_{HKEY,HLUT}_MAX_INDEX which is safe since the value is the last valid index. That commit changed the bounds to: i <= adapter->rss_{key,lut}_size / 4 where `rss_{key,lut}_size / 4` is the number of dwords, so the last valid index is `(rss_{key,lut}_size / 4) - 1`. Therefore, using `<=` accesses one element past the end. Fix the issues by using `<` instead of `<=`, ensuring we do not exceed the bounds. [1] KASAN splat about rss_key_size off-by-one BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in iavf_config_rss+0x619/0x800 Read of size 4 at addr ffff888102c50134 by task kworker/u8:6/63 CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 63 Comm: kworker/u8:6 Not tainted 6.18.0-rc2-enjuk-tnguy-00378-g3005f5b77652-dirty #156 PREEMPT(voluntary) Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.3-debian-1.16.3-2 04/01/2014 Workqueue: iavf iavf_watchdog_task Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x6f/0xb0 print_report+0x170/0x4f3 kasan_report+0xe1/0x1a0 iavf_config_rss+0x619/0x800 iavf_watchdog_task+0x2be7/0x3230 process_one_work+0x7fd/0x1420 worker_thread+0x4d1/0xd40 kthread+0x344/0x660 ret_from_fork+0x249/0x320 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK> Allocated by task 63: kasan_save_stack+0x30/0x50 kasan_save_track+0x14/0x30 __kasan_kmalloc+0x7f/0x90 __kmalloc_noprof+0x246/0x6f0 iavf_watchdog_task+0x28fc/0x3230 process_one_work+0x7fd/0x1420 worker_thread+0x4d1/0xd40 kthread+0x344/0x660 ret_from_fork+0x249/0x320 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 The buggy address belongs to the object at ffff888102c50100 which belongs to the cache kmalloc-64 of size 64 The buggy address is located 0 bytes to the right of allocated 52-byte region [ffff888102c50100, ffff888102c50134) The buggy address belongs to the physical page: page: refcount:0 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x102c50 flags: 0x200000000000000(node=0|zone=2) page_type: f5(slab) raw: 0200000000000000 ffff8881000418c0 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 raw: 0000000000000000 0000000080200020 00000000f5000000 0000000000000000 page dumped because: kasan: bad access detected Memory state around the buggy address: ffff888102c50000: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc ffff888102c50080: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc >ffff888102c50100: 00 00 00 00 00 00 04 fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc ^ ffff888102c50180: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc ffff888102c50200: fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc fc
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>= 4.7.1, < 5.10.248>= 5.11, < 5.15.198>= 5.16, < 6.1.160>= 6.2, < 6.6.120>= 6.7, < 6.12.64>= 6.13, < 6.18.4= 4.7= 6.19CVSS 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 · scoped5.10.2485.15.1986.1.160
Upgrade to kernel 6.1.160+ (or 6.6.120+ if using 6.2+), or the equivalent patch level in your active branch (5.10.248+, 5.15.198+)
- Identify the currently running kernel version using `uname -r`
- Determine which affected version range applies to your current kernel
- Upgrade to the first fixed version in your kernel branch: for 5.10.x upgrade to >=5.10.248, for 5.15.x upgrade to >=5.15.198, for 6.1.x upgrade to >=6.1.160, or for 6.2+ upgrade to >=6.6.120
- Reboot into the new kernel and verify the system boots successfully
- Confirm the fix is applied by checking the iavf driver code contains the corrected loop bounds using '<' instead of '<='
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-2025-71087 — 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-2025-71087 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