Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-21939 is a high-severity NULL Pointer Dereference (CWE-476) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 10th 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-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-9382
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/xe/hmm: Don't dereference struct page pointers without notifier lock The pnfs that we obtain from hmm_range_fault() point to pages that we don't have a reference on, and the guarantee that…
more
they are still in the cpu page-tables is that the notifier lock must be held and the notifier seqno is still valid. So while building the sg table and marking the pages accesses / dirty we need to hold this lock with a validated seqno. However, the lock is reclaim tainted which makes sg_alloc_table_from_pages_segment() unusable, since it internally allocates memory. Instead build the sg-table manually. For the non-iommu case this might lead to fewer coalesces, but if that's a problem it can be fixed up later in the resource cursor code. For the iommu case, the whole sg-table may still be coalesced to a single contigous device va region. This avoids marking pages that we don't own dirty and accessed, and it also avoid dereferencing struct pages that we don't own. v2: - Use assert to check whether hmm pfns are valid (Matthew Auld) - Take into account that large pages may cross range boundaries (Matthew Auld) v3: - Don't unnecessarily check for a non-freed sg-table. (Matthew Auld) - Add a missing up_read() in an error path. (Matthew Auld) (cherry picked from commit ea3e66d280ce2576664a862693d1da8fd324c317)
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including static analysis) directly finds null-dereference bugs before deployment.
Documented development standards and tools can enforce null-safety rules and safe pointer usage.
Engineering principles can mandate defensive coding such as explicit null checks before dereference.
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 (static analysis, code review, safe coding standards) directly prevent NULL dereference bugs during development.
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 can detect NULL dereference defects before release.
Secure SDLC mandates defensive coding practices that can prevent NULL dereferences.
Application security requirements can specify input validation and pointer-safety rules.
Secure architecture principles encourage defensive design that avoids unsafe pointer use.
Secure coding standards directly require NULL-pointer checks and safe dereference patterns.