CVE-2025-71095
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: net: stmmac: fix the crash issue for zero copy XDP_TX action There is a crash issue when running zero copy XDP_TX action, the crash log is shown below. [ 216.122464] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address fffeffff80000000 [ 216.187524] Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000144 [#1] SMP [ 216.301694] Call trace: [ 216.304130] dcache_clean_poc+0x20/0x38 (P) [ 216.308308] __dma_sync_single_for_device+0x1bc/0x1e0 [ 216.313351] stmmac_xdp_xmit_xdpf+0x354/0x400 [ 216.317701] __stmmac_xdp_run_prog+0x164/0x368 [ 216.322139] stmmac_napi_poll_rxtx+0xba8/0xf00 [ 216.326576] __napi_poll+0x40/0x218 [ 216.408054] Kernel panic - not syncing: Oops: Fatal exception in interrupt For XDP_TX action, the xdp_buff is converted to xdp_frame by xdp_convert_buff_to_frame(). The memory type of the resulting xdp_frame depends on the memory type of the xdp_buff. For page pool based xdp_buff it produces xdp_frame with memory type MEM_TYPE_PAGE_POOL. For zero copy XSK pool based xdp_buff it produces xdp_frame with memory type MEM_TYPE_PAGE_ORDER0. However, stmmac_xdp_xmit_back() does not check the memory type and always uses the page pool type, this leads to invalid mappings and causes the crash. Therefore, check the xdp_buff memory type in stmmac_xdp_xmit_back() to fix this issue.
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>= 5.13.1, < 6.1.160>= 6.2, < 6.6.120>= 6.7, < 6.12.64>= 6.13, < 6.18.4= 5.13= 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 · scoped6.1.1606.6.1206.12.64
6.1.160+ or 6.6.120+ or 6.12.64+ or 6.18.4+ (depending on kernel branch)
- Identify the currently running Linux kernel version using `uname -r`
- Based on the current version, determine the appropriate upgrade path based on the stable kernel release series you are using
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to one of the fixed versions: 6.1.160 or later (for 6.1.y series), 6.6.120 or later (for 6.6.y series), 6.12.64 or later (for 6.12.y series), or 6.18.4 or later (for 6.13.y-6.17.y series)
- Reboot the system to load the new kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version and confirming the stmmac driver no longer crashes during zero copy XDP_TX operations
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-2025-71095 — 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-2025-71095 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