CVE-2025-71116VulnerabilityPublished 10 Aug 2026Updated 29 Oct 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: kernel security, bug fix, and enhancement update

Affects Red Hat kernel security,Source GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Authoritative record:CVE-2025-71116· Critical 9.1

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.1 Critical · fixed in Red Hat package updates : patch Red Hat kernel security, as a priority.

Data as of 29 Oct 2026, 09:13 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.1Critical

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 39% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in e927ab132b87ba3f076705fc2684d94b24201ed1, d061be4c8040ffb1110d537654a038b8b6ad39d2, c82e39ff67353a5a6cbc07b786b8690bd2c45aaa +4

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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 14 Jan 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 29 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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 to a fixed release listed under Affected software.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 4f6a7e5ee1393ec4b243b39dac9f36992d161540, < e927ab132b87ba3f076705fc2684d94b24201ed1	Fixed in e927ab132b87ba3f076705fc2684d94b24201ed1
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 4f6a7e5ee1393ec4b243b39dac9f36992d161540, < d061be4c8040ffb1110d537654a038b8b6ad39d2	Fixed in d061be4c8040ffb1110d537654a038b8b6ad39d2
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 4f6a7e5ee1393ec4b243b39dac9f36992d161540, < c82e39ff67353a5a6cbc07b786b8690bd2c45aaa	Fixed in c82e39ff67353a5a6cbc07b786b8690bd2c45aaa
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 4f6a7e5ee1393ec4b243b39dac9f36992d161540, < 145d140abda80e33331c5781d6603014fa75d258	Fixed in 145d140abda80e33331c5781d6603014fa75d258
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 4f6a7e5ee1393ec4b243b39dac9f36992d161540, < 8c738512714e8c0aa18f8a10c072d5b01c83db39	Fixed in 8c738512714e8c0aa18f8a10c072d5b01c83db39
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 4f6a7e5ee1393ec4b243b39dac9f36992d161540, < 5d0d8c292531fe356c4e94dcfdf7d7212aca9957	Fixed in 5d0d8c292531fe356c4e94dcfdf7d7212aca9957

Description

The kernel packages contain the Linux kernel, the core of any Linux operating system. Security Fix(es): * kernel: libceph: make decode_pool() more resilient against corrupted osdmaps (CVE-2025-71116) * kernel: libceph: replace overzealous BUG_ON in osdmap_apply_incremental() (CVE-2026-22990) * kernel: smb: client: fix OOB reads parsing symlink error response (CVE-2026-31613) * kernel: xen/privcmd: fix double free via VMA splitting (CVE-2026-31787) * kernel: fs/smb/client: fix out-of-bounds read in cifs_sanitize_prepath (CVE-2026-43112) * kernel: selinux: fix overlayfs mmap() and mprotect() access checks (CVE-2026-46054) * kernel: ipc: limit next_id allocation to the valid ID range (CVE-2026-52923) * kernel: drm/xe: Fix error cleanup in xe_exec_queue_create_ioctl() (CVE-2026-52976) Bug Fix(es) and Enhancement(s): * xfs corruption from [xfs_trans_cancel] during inode allocation [rhel-10.0.z] (JIRA:RHEL-142606) * [RFE] Requesting FOU and GUE/GRE support in RHEL 10 [rhel-10.0.z] (JIRA:RHEL-144983) * "Send error in SessSetup" messages fill up the logs [rhel-10.0.z] (JIRA:RHEL-145510) * Host kernel panics with "unexpected #NM exception" at restore_fpregs_from_fpstate [rhel-10.0.z] (JIRA:RHEL-148634) * blktests throtl/001 failed [rhel-10.0.z] (JIRA:RHEL-180588) * RHEL 10: s390: Revert support for DCACHE_WORD_ACCESS [rhel-10.0.z] (JIRA:RHEL-188179) For more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSS score, acknowledgments, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s) listed in the References section.

CWE-125Out-of-bounds Read (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #8
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design · Language Selection
Use a language that provides appropriate memory abstractions.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Overread Buffers (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-617Reachable Assertion (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product contains an assert() or similar statement that can be triggered by an attacker, which leads to an application exit or other behavior that is more severe than necessary.
Implementation
If the assertion statement is required (e.g., for security or reliability), change the invoking code to avoid the conditions that trigger the assertion.
Implementation
Consider changing the assertion to some other less "fatal" error. This might not be easy to implement, since other code may be needed to handle the error.
Implementation
Make sensitive open/close operations non-reachable from directly user-controlled data (e.g. open/close resources)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-763Release of Invalid Pointer or Reference (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product attempts to return a memory resource to the system, but it calls the wrong release function or calls the appropriate release function incorrectly.
Implementation
Only call matching memory management functions. Do not mix and match routines. For example, when you allocate a buffer with malloc(), dispose of the original pointer with free().
Implementation
When programming in C++, consider using smart pointers provided by the boost library to help correctly and consistently manage memory.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-280Improper Handling of Insufficient Permissions or Privileges (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A10:2025: Mishandling of Exceptional Conditions (opens in a new tab)
The product does not handle or incorrectly handles when it has insufficient privileges to access resources or functionality as specified by their permissions. This may cause it to follow unexpected code paths that may leave the product in an invalid state.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
Implementation
Always check to see if you have successfully accessed a resource or system functionality, and use proper error handling if it is unsuccessful. Do this even when you are operating in a highly privileged mode, because errors or environmental conditions might still cause a failure.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-825Expired Pointer Dereference (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product dereferences a pointer that contains a location for memory that was previously valid, but is no longer valid.
Architecture and Design
Choose a language that provides automatic memory management.
Implementation
When freeing pointers, be sure to set them to NULL once they are freed. However, the utilization of multiple or complex data structures may lower the usefulness of this strategy.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (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-125, CWE-617, CWE-763 +2

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats