CVE-2025-21839

Public on

Last Modified: UTC

Description

The MITRE CVE dictionary describes this issue as

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: KVM: x86: Load DR6 with guest value only before entering .vcpu_run() loop Move the conditional loading of hardware DR6 with the guest's DR6 value out of the core .vcpu_run() loop to fix a bug where KVM can load hardware with a stale vcpu->arch.dr6. When the guest accesses a DR and host userspace isn't debugging the guest, KVM disables DR interception and loads the guest's values into hardware on VM-Enter and saves them on VM-Exit. This allows the guest to access DRs at will, e.g. so that a sequence of DR accesses to configure a breakpoint only generates one VM-Exit. For DR0-DR3, the logic/behavior is identical between VMX and SVM, and also identical between KVM_DEBUGREG_BP_ENABLED (userspace debugging the guest) and KVM_DEBUGREG_WONT_EXIT (guest using DRs), and so KVM handles loading DR0-DR3 in common code, _outside_ of the core kvm_x86_ops.vcpu_run() loop. But for DR6, the guest's value doesn't need to be loaded into hardware for KVM_DEBUGREG_BP_ENABLED, and SVM provides a dedicated VMCB field whereas VMX requires software to manually load the guest value, and so loading the guest's value into DR6 is handled by {svm,vmx}_vcpu_run(), i.e. is done _inside_ the core run loop. Unfortunately, saving the guest values on VM-Exit is initiated by common x86, again outside of the core run loop. If the guest modifies DR6 (in hardware, when DR interception is disabled), and then the next VM-Exit is a fastpath VM-Exit, KVM will reload hardware DR6 with vcpu->arch.dr6 and clobber the guest's actual value. The bug shows up primarily with nested VMX because KVM handles the VMX preemption timer in the fastpath, and the window between hardware DR6 being modified (in guest context) and DR6 being read by guest software is orders of magnitude larger in a nested setup. E.g. in non-nested, the VMX preemption timer would need to fire precisely between #DB injection and the #DB handler's read of DR6, whereas with a KVM-on-KVM setup, the window where hardware DR6 is "dirty" extends all the way from L1 writing DR6 to VMRESUME (in L1). L1's view: ========== <L1 disables DR interception> CPU 0/KVM-7289 [023] d.... 2925.640961: kvm_entry: vcpu 0 A: L1 Writes DR6 CPU 0/KVM-7289 [023] d.... 2925.640963: <hack>: Set DRs, DR6 = 0xffff0ff1 B: CPU 0/KVM-7289 [023] d.... 2925.640967: kvm_exit: vcpu 0 reason EXTERNAL_INTERRUPT intr_info 0x800000ec D: L1 reads DR6, arch.dr6 = 0 CPU 0/KVM-7289 [023] d.... 2925.640969: <hack>: Sync DRs, DR6 = 0xffff0ff0 CPU 0/KVM-7289 [023] d.... 2925.640976: kvm_entry: vcpu 0 L2 reads DR6, L1 disables DR interception CPU 0/KVM-7289 [023] d.... 2925.640980: kvm_exit: vcpu 0 reason DR_ACCESS info1 0x0000000000000216 CPU 0/KVM-7289 [023] d.... 2925.640983: kvm_entry: vcpu 0 CPU 0/KVM-7289 [023] d.... 2925.640983: <hack>: Set DRs, DR6 = 0xffff0ff0 L2 detects failure CPU 0/KVM-7289 [023] d.... 2925.640987: kvm_exit: vcpu 0 reason HLT L1 reads DR6 (confirms failure) CPU 0/KVM-7289 [023] d.... 2925.640990: <hack>: Sync DRs, DR6 = 0xffff0ff0 L0's view: ========== L2 reads DR6, arch.dr6 = 0 CPU 23/KVM-5046 [001] d.... 3410.005610: kvm_exit: vcpu 23 reason DR_ACCESS info1 0x0000000000000216 CPU 23/KVM-5046 [001] ..... 3410.005610: kvm_nested_vmexit: vcpu 23 reason DR_ACCESS info1 0x0000000000000216 L2 => L1 nested VM-Exit CPU 23/KVM-5046 [001] ..... 3410.005610: kvm_nested_vmexit_inject: reason: DR_ACCESS ext_inf1: 0x0000000000000216 CPU 23/KVM-5046 [001] d.... 3410.005610: kvm_entry: vcpu 23 CPU 23/KVM-5046 [001] d.... 3410.005611: kvm_exit: vcpu 23 reason VMREAD CPU 23/KVM-5046 [001] d.... 3410.005611: kvm_entry: vcpu 23 CPU 23/KVM-5046 [001] d.... 3410. ---truncated---

Additional Information

External References

Content from www.cve.org is not included.https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-21839

Content from nvd.nist.gov is not included.https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-21839

Content from lore.kernel.org is not included.https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/2025030707-CVE-2025-21839-dfd9@gregkh/T

Affected Packages and Issued Red Hat Security Errata

Products / Services Components State Errata
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 kernel Affected
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 kernel Out of support scope
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 kernel Out of support scope
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 kernel-rt Out of support scope
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 kernel Out of support scope
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 kernel-rt Out of support scope
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 kernel Fixed RHSA-2025:20518
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 kernel-rt Will not fix
Unless explicitly stated as not affected, all previous versions of packages in any minor update stream of a product listed here should be assumed vulnerable, although may not have been subject to full analysis.

Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details

Important note

CVSS scores for open source components depend on vendor-specific factors (e.g. version or build chain). Therefore, Red Hat's score and impact rating can be different from NVD and other vendors. Red Hat remains the authoritative CVE Naming Authorities (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications ).

CVSS v3 Score Breakdown Red Hat NVD
CVSS v3 Base Score 5.5 5.5
Attack Vector Local Local
Attack Complexity Low Low
Privileges Required Low Low
User Interaction None None
Scope Unchanged Unchanged
Confidentiality Impact None None
Integrity Impact None None
Availability Impact High High

CVSS v3 Vector

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

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

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is Red Hat's CVSS v3 score or Impact different from other vendors?

For open source software shipped by multiple vendors, the CVSS base scores may vary for each vendor's version depending on the version they ship, how they ship it, the platform, and even how the software is compiled. This makes scoring of vulnerabilities difficult for third-party vulnerability databases such as NVD that only provide a single CVSS base score for each vulnerability. Red Hat scores reflect how a vulnerability affects our products specifically.

For more information, see https://access.redhat.com/solutions/762393.

My product is listed as "Under investigation" or "Affected", when will Red Hat release a fix for this vulnerability?

  • "Under investigation" doesn't necessarily mean that the product is affected by this vulnerability. It only means that our Analysis Team is still working on determining whether the product is affected and how it is affected.
  • "Affected" means that our Analysis Team has determined that this product is affected by this vulnerability and might release a fix to address this in the near future.

What can I do if my product is listed as "Will not fix"?

A "will not fix" status means that a fix for an affected product version is not planned or not possible due to complexity, which may create additional risk.

Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
  • Upgrade to a supported product version that includes a fix for this vulnerability (recommended).
  • Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
  • Open a This content is not included.support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.

What can I do if my product is listed as "Fix deferred"?

A deferred status means that a fix for an affected product version is not guaranteed due to higher-priority development work.

Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
  • Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
  • Open a This content is not included.support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.
  • Red Hat Engineering focuses on addressing high-priority issues based on their complexity or limited lifecycle support. Therefore, lower-priority issues will not receive immediate fixes.

What is a mitigation?

A mitigation is an action that can be taken to reduce the impact of a security vulnerability, without deploying any fixes.

I have a Red Hat product but it is not in the above list, is it affected?

The listed products were found to include one or more of the components that this vulnerability affects. These products underwent a thorough evaluation to determine their affectedness by this vulnerability. Note that layered products (such as container-based offerings) that consume affected components from any of the products listed in this table may be affected and are not represented.

Why is my security scanner reporting my product as vulnerable to this vulnerability even though my product version is fixed or not affected?

In order to maintain code stability and compatibility, Red Hat usually does not rebase packages to entirely new versions. Instead, we backport fixes and new features to an older version of the package we distribute. This can result in some security scanners that only consider the package version to report the package as vulnerable. To avoid this, we suggest that you use an approved vulnerability scanner from our This content is not included.Red Hat Vulnerability Scanner Certification program.

My product is listed as "Out of Support Scope". What does this mean?

When a product is listed as "Out of Support Scope", it means a vulnerability with the impact level assigned to this CVE is no longer covered by its current support lifecycle phase. The product has been identified to contain the impacted component, but analysis to determine whether it is affected or not by this vulnerability was not performed. The product should be assumed to be affected. Customers are advised to apply any mitigation options documented on this page, consider removing or disabling the impacted component, or upgrade to a supported version of the product that has an update available.