CVE-2025-39886 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2025-39886
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress

Attack Complexity Details

Attack Complexity:
Attack Complexity Analysis In Progress
Attack Vector:
Attack Vector Under Analysis
Privileges Required: None
No authentication is required for exploitation.
Scope:
Impact is confined to the initially vulnerable component.
User Interaction: None
No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2025-39886 Details

Status: Received on 23 Sep 2025, 06:15 UTC

Published on: 23 Sep 2025, 06:15 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2025-39886 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2025-39886: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Tell memcg to use allow_spinning=false path in bpf_timer_init() Currently, calling bpf_map_kmalloc_node() from __bpf_async_init() can cause various locking issues; see the following stack trace (edited for style) as one example: ... [10.011566] do_raw_spin_lock.cold [10.011570] try_to_wake_up (5) double-acquiring the same [10.011575] kick_pool rq_lock, causing a hardlockup [10.011579] __queue_work [10.011582] queue_work_on [10.011585] kernfs_notify [10.011589] cgroup_file_notify [10.011593] try_charge_memcg (4) memcg accounting raises an [10.011597] obj_cgroup_charge_pages MEMCG_MAX event [10.011599] obj_cgroup_charge_account [10.011600] __memcg_slab_post_alloc_hook [10.011603] __kmalloc_node_noprof ... [10.011611] bpf_map_kmalloc_node [10.011612] __bpf_async_init [10.011615] bpf_timer_init (3) BPF calls bpf_timer_init() [10.011617] bpf_prog_xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx_fcg_runnable [10.011619] bpf__sched_ext_ops_runnable [10.011620] enqueue_task_scx (2) BPF runs with rq_lock held [10.011622] enqueue_task [10.011626] ttwu_do_activate [10.011629] sched_ttwu_pending (1) grabs rq_lock ... The above was reproduced on bpf-next (b338cf849ec8) by modifying ./tools/sched_ext/scx_flatcg.bpf.c to call bpf_timer_init() during ops.runnable(), and hacking the memcg accounting code a bit to make a bpf_timer_init() call more likely to raise an MEMCG_MAX event. We have also run into other similar variants (both internally and on bpf-next), including double-acquiring cgroup_file_kn_lock, the same worker_pool::lock, etc. As suggested by Shakeel, fix this by using __GFP_HIGH instead of GFP_ATOMIC in __bpf_async_init(), so that e.g. if try_charge_memcg() raises an MEMCG_MAX event, we call __memcg_memory_event() with @allow_spinning=false and avoid calling cgroup_file_notify() there. Depends on mm patch "memcg: skip cgroup_file_notify if spinning is not allowed": https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20250905201606.66198-1-shakeel.butt@linux.dev/ v0 approach s/bpf_map_kmalloc_node/bpf_mem_alloc/ https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20250905061919.439648-1-yepeilin@google.com/ v1 approach: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20250905234547.862249-1-yepeilin@google.com/

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2025-39886

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2025-39886 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2025-39886

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2025-39886.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2025-39886, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2025-39886, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

Confidentiality: None
CVE-2025-39886 does not compromise confidentiality.
Integrity: None
CVE-2025-39886 does not impact data integrity.
Availability: None
CVE-2025-39886 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2025-39886 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2025-39886: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

CVE-2025-9588 – Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') vulnerability in Iron Mountain Archiving Services Inc. E...
CVE-2025-10851 – A security flaw has been discovered in Campcodes Gym Management System 1.0. Impacted is an unknown function of the file /ajax.php?action=login. Per...
CVE-2025-10848 – A vulnerability was identified in Campcodes Society Membership Information System 1.0. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file /chec...
CVE-2025-10846 – A vulnerability was determined in Portabilis i-Educar up to 2.10. This vulnerability affects unknown code of the file /module/ComponenteCurricular/...
CVE-2025-10845 – A vulnerability was found in Portabilis i-Educar up to 2.10. This affects an unknown part of the file /module/ComponenteCurricular/view. The manipu...