CVE-2025-40105

vfs: Don't leak disconnected dentries on umount

HIGH
7.8
CVSS Score
Published: October 30, 2025 at 09:48 AM UTC
Updated: October 19, 2026 at 09:10 PM UTC
4 products affected across 2 vendorsLinux KernelSIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 Pn /dp MFP FirmwareSiplus S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 Pn /dp MFP Firmware

Using Linux by Linux?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect Linux - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
HIGH7.8
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.2%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: vfs: Don't leak disconnected dentries on umount When user calls open_by_handle_at() on some inode that is not cached, we will create disconnected dentry for it. If such dentry is a directory, exportfs_decode_fh_raw() will then try to connect this dentry to the dentry tree through reconnect_path(). It may happen for various reasons (such as corrupted fs or race with rename) that the call to lookup_one_unlocked() in reconnect_one() will fail to find the dentry we are trying to reconnect and instead create a new dentry under the parent. Now this dentry will not be marked as disconnected although the parent still may well be disconnected (at least in case this inconsistency happened because the fs is corrupted and .. doesn't point to the real parent directory). This creates inconsistency in disconnected flags but AFAICS it was mostly harmless. At least until commit f1ee616214cb ("VFS: don't keep disconnected dentries on d_anon") which removed adding of most disconnected dentries to sb->s_anon list. Thus after this commit cleanup of disconnected dentries implicitely relies on the fact that dput() will immediately reclaim such dentries. However when some leaf dentry isn't marked as disconnected, as in the scenario described above, the reclaim doesn't happen and the dentries are "leaked". Memory reclaim can eventually reclaim them but otherwise they stay in memory and if umount comes first, we hit infamous "Busy inodes after unmount" bug. Make sure all dentries created under a disconnected parent are marked as disconnected as well.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

4.16f1ee616214cb22410e939d963bbb2349c2570f02
Vendor states this is fixed in 20863bb7fbb016379f8227122edfabc5c799bc79 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 56094ad3eaa21e6621396cc33811d8f72847a834 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 620f3b0ede9c5cb4976cd0457d0b04ad551e5d6b (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7e0c8aaf4e28918abded547a5147c7d52c4af7d2 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 8004d4b8cbf1bd68a23c160d57287e177c82cc69 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in b5abafd0aa8d7bcb935c8f91e4cfc2f2820759e4 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in cebfbf40056a4d858b2a3ca59a69936d599bd209 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in eadc49999fa994d6fbd70c332bd5d5051cc42261 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 4.16 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.10.246 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.15.196 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.4.301 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.1.158 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.12.55 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.17.5 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.18 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.6.114 (unaffected)

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet, and no fixed version or vendor advisory is recorded against it.

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitNot automatableTotal impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

7.8HIGHLinux
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusDEFERRED

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card