CVE-2025-71079 Affecting kernel-docs-html package, versions <6.12.0-160000.26.1
Threat Intelligence
The probability is the direct output of the EPSS model, and conveys an overall sense of the threat of exploitation in the wild. The percentile measures the EPSS probability relative to all known EPSS scores. Note: This data is updated daily, relying on the latest available EPSS model version. Check out the EPSS documentation for more details.
Do your applications use this vulnerable package?
In a few clicks we can analyze your entire application and see what components are vulnerable in your application, and suggest you quick fixes.
Test your applications- Snyk IDSNYK-SLES1600-KERNELDOCSHTML-15433108
- published6 Mar 2026
- disclosed27 Feb 2026
Introduced: 27 Feb 2026
NewCVE-2025-71079 (opens in a new tab)How to fix?
Upgrade SLES:16.0.0 kernel-docs-html to version 6.12.0-160000.26.1 or higher.
NVD Description
Note: Versions mentioned in the description apply only to the upstream kernel-docs-html package and not the kernel-docs-html package as distributed by SLES.
See How to fix? for SLES:16.0.0 relevant fixed versions and status.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: nfc: fix deadlock between nfc_unregister_device and rfkill_fop_write
A deadlock can occur between nfc_unregister_device() and rfkill_fop_write() due to lock ordering inversion between device_lock and rfkill_global_mutex.
The problematic lock order is:
Thread A (rfkill_fop_write): rfkill_fop_write() mutex_lock(&rfkill_global_mutex) rfkill_set_block() nfc_rfkill_set_block() nfc_dev_down() device_lock(&dev->dev) <- waits for device_lock
Thread B (nfc_unregister_device): nfc_unregister_device() device_lock(&dev->dev) rfkill_unregister() mutex_lock(&rfkill_global_mutex) <- waits for rfkill_global_mutex
This creates a classic ABBA deadlock scenario.
Fix this by moving rfkill_unregister() and rfkill_destroy() outside the device_lock critical section. Store the rfkill pointer in a local variable before releasing the lock, then call rfkill_unregister() after releasing device_lock.
This change is safe because rfkill_fop_write() holds rfkill_global_mutex while calling the rfkill callbacks, and rfkill_unregister() also acquires rfkill_global_mutex before cleanup. Therefore, rfkill_unregister() will wait for any ongoing callback to complete before proceeding, and device_del() is only called after rfkill_unregister() returns, preventing any use-after-free.
The similar lock ordering in nfc_register_device() (device_lock -> rfkill_global_mutex via rfkill_register) is safe because during registration the device is not yet in rfkill_list, so no concurrent rfkill operations can occur on this device.
References
- https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-71079.html
- https://bugzilla.suse.com/1256619
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1ab526d97a57e44d26fadcc0e9adeb9c0c0182f5
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/6b93c8ab6f6cda8818983a4ae3fcf84b023037b4
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/8fc4632fb508432895430cd02b38086bdd649083
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ee41f4f3ccf8cd6ba3732e867abbec7e6d8d12e5
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f3a8a7c1aa278f2378b2f3a10500c6674dffdfda
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2e0831e9fc46a06daa6d4d8d57a2738e343130c3
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e02a1c33f10a0ed3aba855ab8ae2b6c4c5be8012