CVE-2025-71079 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2025-71079
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress
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-2025-71079 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Last updated: 🕐 19 Jan 2026, 13:16 UTC
Originally published on: 🕓 13 Jan 2026, 16:16 UTC

Time between publication and last update: 5 days

CVSS Release:

CVE-2025-71079 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2025-71079: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: nfc: fix deadlock between nfc_unregister_device and rfkill_fop_write A deadlock can occur between nfc_unregister_device() and rfkill_fop_write() due to lock ordering inversion between device_lock and rfkill_global_mutex. The problematic lock order is: Thread A (rfkill_fop_write): rfkill_fop_write() mutex_lock(&rfkill_global_mutex) rfkill_set_block() nfc_rfkill_set_block() nfc_dev_down() device_lock(&dev->dev) <- waits for device_lock Thread B (nfc_unregister_device): nfc_unregister_device() device_lock(&dev->dev) rfkill_unregister() mutex_lock(&rfkill_global_mutex) <- waits for rfkill_global_mutex This creates a classic ABBA deadlock scenario. Fix this by moving rfkill_unregister() and rfkill_destroy() outside the device_lock critical section. Store the rfkill pointer in a local variable before releasing the lock, then call rfkill_unregister() after releasing device_lock. This change is safe because rfkill_fop_write() holds rfkill_global_mutex while calling the rfkill callbacks, and rfkill_unregister() also acquires rfkill_global_mutex before cleanup. Therefore, rfkill_unregister() will wait for any ongoing callback to complete before proceeding, and device_del() is only called after rfkill_unregister() returns, preventing any use-after-free. The similar lock ordering in nfc_register_device() (device_lock -> rfkill_global_mutex via rfkill_register) is safe because during registration the device is not yet in rfkill_list, so no concurrent rfkill operations can occur on this device.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2025-71079

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2025-71079 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-2025-71079

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2025-71079.

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-2025-71079, 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-2025-71079, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2025-71079 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2025-71079 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2025-71079 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2025-71079 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2025-71079: 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-2026-3288 – A security issue was discovered in ingress-nginx where the `nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/rewrite-target` Ingress annotation can be used to inject co...
  • CVE-2026-31816 – Budibase is a low code platform for creating internal tools, workflows, and admin panels. In 3.31.4 and earlier, the Budibase server's authorized()...
  • CVE-2026-30240 – Budibase is a low code platform for creating internal tools, workflows, and admin panels. In 3.31.5 and earlier, a path traversal vulnerability in ...
  • CVE-2026-25960 – vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models (LLMs). The SSRF protection fix for CVE-2026-24779 add in 0.15.1 can be bypassed ...
  • CVE-2026-25737 – Budibase is a low code platform for creating internal tools, workflows, and admin panels. In 3.24.0 and earlier, an arbitrary file upload vulnerabi...