VulnerabilityPublished 23 Sep 2025Updated 21 Oct 2026

CVE-2025-39878: Linux kernel · ceph: fix crash after fscrypt_encrypt_pagecache_blocks() error

Affects Linux kernelSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.5 Medium · fixed in dd1616ecbea920d228c56729461ed223cc501425 : update Linux kernel when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 11:20 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.5Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS

0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 8% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

Exploitation: No evidence of active exploitation and no public proof of concept
Automatable: Attackers cannot reliably automate steps 1–4 of the kill chain
Technical impact: Limited control over the software or limited information exposure

CISA SSVC assessment, 2026-01-14.

Patch

Available – fixed in dd1616ecbea920d228c56729461ed223cc501425, 249e0a47cdb46bb9eae65511c569044bd8698d7d, 4a918f04cf97b2436a8dfe5cb51bb33f8e8831f4

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: High

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 23 Sep 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade Linux kernel to dd1616ecbea920d228c56729461ed223cc501425, 249e0a47cdb46bb9eae65511c569044bd8698d7d or 4a918f04cf97b2436a8dfe5cb51bb33f8e8831f4.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ ce80b76dd32764cc914975777e058d4fae4f0ea0, < dd1616ecbea920d228c56729461ed223cc501425	Fixed in dd1616ecbea920d228c56729461ed223cc501425
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ ce80b76dd32764cc914975777e058d4fae4f0ea0, < 249e0a47cdb46bb9eae65511c569044bd8698d7d	Fixed in 249e0a47cdb46bb9eae65511c569044bd8698d7d
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 0f2b2b7cacf888229cec19126e6791b11fb35f32, < 4a918f04cf97b2436a8dfe5cb51bb33f8e8831f4	Fixed in 4a918f04cf97b2436a8dfe5cb51bb33f8e8831f4
LinuxLinux	Affected =6.15	Fixed in–

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ceph: fix crash after fscrypt_encrypt_pagecache_blocks() error The function move_dirty_folio_in_page_array() was created by commit ce80b76dd327 ("ceph: introduce ceph_process_folio_batch() method") by moving code from ceph_writepages_start() to this function. This new function is supposed to return an error code which is checked by the caller (now ceph_process_folio_batch()), and on error, the caller invokes redirty_page_for_writepage() and then breaks from the loop. However, the refactoring commit has gone wrong, and it by accident, it always returns 0 (= success) because it first NULLs the pointer and then returns PTR_ERR(NULL) which is always 0. This means errors are silently ignored, leaving NULL entries in the page array, which may later crash the kernel. The simple solution is to call PTR_ERR() before clearing the pointer.

CWE-476NULL Pointer Dereference (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #13OWASP Top 10 A10:2025: Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.
Implementation
For any pointers that could have been modified or provided from a function that can return NULL, check the pointer for NULL before use. When working with a multithreaded or otherwise asynchronous environment, ensure that proper locking APIs are used to lock before the check, and unlock when it has finished.
Requirements
Select a programming language that is not susceptible to these issues.
Implementation
Check the results of all functions that return a value and verify that the value is non-null before acting upon it.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V11.1.7 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

WeaknessesCWE-476

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats