Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2025-21861 is a medium-severity Use After Free (CWE-416) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 13th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-7599
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/migrate_device: don't add folio to be freed to LRU in migrate_device_finalize() If migration succeeded, we called folio_migrate_flags()->mem_cgroup_migrate() to migrate the memcg from the old to the new folio. This will…
more
set memcg_data of the old folio to 0. Similarly, if migration failed, memcg_data of the dst folio is left unset. If we call folio_putback_lru() on such folios (memcg_data == 0), we will add the folio to be freed to the LRU, making memcg code unhappy. Running the hmm selftests: # ./hmm-tests ... # RUN hmm.hmm_device_private.migrate ... [ 102.078007][T14893] page: refcount:1 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x7ff27d200 pfn:0x13cc00 [ 102.079974][T14893] anon flags: 0x17ff00000020018(uptodate|dirty|swapbacked|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x7ff) [ 102.082037][T14893] raw: 017ff00000020018 dead000000000100 dead000000000122 ffff8881353896c9 [ 102.083687][T14893] raw: 00000007ff27d200 0000000000000000 00000001ffffffff 0000000000000000 [ 102.085331][T14893] page dumped because: VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_FOLIO(!memcg && !mem_cgroup_disabled()) [ 102.087230][T14893] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 102.088279][T14893] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 14893 at ./include/linux/memcontrol.h:726 folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave+0x10e/0x170 [ 102.090478][T14893] Modules linked in: [ 102.091244][T14893] CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 14893 Comm: hmm-tests Not tainted 6.13.0-09623-g6c216bc522fd #151 [ 102.093089][T14893] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.3-2.fc40 04/01/2014 [ 102.094848][T14893] RIP: 0010:folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave+0x10e/0x170 [ 102.096104][T14893] Code: ... [ 102.099908][T14893] RSP: 0018:ffffc900236c37b0 EFLAGS: 00010293 [ 102.101152][T14893] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffea0004f30000 RCX: ffffffff8183f426 [ 102.102684][T14893] RDX: ffff8881063cb880 RSI: ffffffff81b8117f RDI: ffff8881063cb880 [ 102.104227][T14893] RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000005 R09: 0000000000000000 [ 102.105757][T14893] R10: 0000000000000001 R11: 0000000000000002 R12: ffffc900236c37d8 [ 102.107296][T14893] R13: ffff888277a2bcb0 R14: 000000000000001f R15: 0000000000000000 [ 102.108830][T14893] FS: 00007ff27dbdd740(0000) GS:ffff888277a00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 102.110643][T14893] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 102.111924][T14893] CR2: 00007ff27d400000 CR3: 000000010866e000 CR4: 0000000000750ef0 [ 102.113478][T14893] PKRU: 55555554 [ 102.114172][T14893] Call Trace: [ 102.114805][T14893] <TASK> [ 102.115397][T14893] ? folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave+0x10e/0x170 [ 102.116547][T14893] ? __warn.cold+0x110/0x210 [ 102.117461][T14893] ? folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave+0x10e/0x170 [ 102.118667][T14893] ? report_bug+0x1b9/0x320 [ 102.119571][T14893] ? handle_bug+0x54/0x90 [ 102.120494][T14893] ? exc_invalid_op+0x17/0x50 [ 102.121433][T14893] ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20 [ 102.122435][T14893] ? __wake_up_klogd.part.0+0x76/0xd0 [ 102.123506][T14893] ? dump_page+0x4f/0x60 [ 102.124352][T14893] ? folio_lruvec_lock_irqsave+0x10e/0x170 [ 102.125500][T14893] folio_batch_move_lru+0xd4/0x200 [ 102.126577][T14893] ? __pfx_lru_add+0x10/0x10 [ 102.127505][T14893] __folio_batch_add_and_move+0x391/0x720 [ 102.128633][T14893] ? __pfx_lru_add+0x10/0x10 [ 102.129550][T14893] folio_putback_lru+0x16/0x80 [ 102.130564][T14893] migrate_device_finalize+0x9b/0x530 [ 102.131640][T14893] dmirror_migrate_to_device.constprop.0+0x7c5/0xad0 [ 102.133047][T14893] dmirror_fops_unlocked_ioctl+0x89b/0xc80 Likely, nothing else goes wrong: putting the last folio reference will remove the folio from the LRU again. So besides memcg complaining, adding the folio to be freed to the LRU is just an unnecessary step. The new flow resembles what we have in migrate_folio_move(): add the dst to the lru, rem ---truncated---
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 3 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V1.4.3
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover use-after-free bugs through dynamic analysis or fuzzing.
Engineering principles can require memory-safe constructs or languages that structurally avoid introducing use-after-free.
Process isolation confines the blast radius of use-after-free memory corruption to a single execution domain.
Memory protection controls limit exploitation impact by blocking unauthorized code execution from dangling pointers.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly incorporate memory-safety tooling and reviews that prevent most use-after-free defects.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover use-after-free issues via scanning or analysis but do not prevent their introduction.
Routine patching removes known use-after-free instances after they have been introduced in released software.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development can detect use-after-free bugs before release.
Secure SDLC mandates memory-safety practices that reduce use-after-free defects.
Application security requirements can specify memory-management rules that mitigate use-after-free.
Secure architecture principles include memory-safety design choices that limit use-after-free exposure.
Secure coding standards directly prescribe avoidance of use-after-free patterns.
Change-management processes help ensure memory-safety fixes are deployed consistently.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (1 rule)
- V-248592 OL 8 must clear memory when it is freed to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-416
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-230279 RHEL 8 must clear memory when it is freed to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-416
RHEL 9 (1 rule)
- V-257794 RHEL 9 must clear memory when it is freed to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-416