Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: spufs: fix gang directory...
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
spufs: fix gang directory lifetimes
prior to "[POWERPC] spufs: Fix gang destroy leaks" we used to have
a problem with gang lifetimes - creation of a gang returns opened
gang directory, which normally gets removed when that gets closed,
but if somebody has created a context belonging to that gang and
kept it alive until the gang got closed, removal failed and we
ended up with a leak.
Unfortunately, it had been fixed the wrong way. Dentry of gang
directory was no longer pinned, and rmdir on close was gone.
One problem was that failure of open kept calling simple_rmdir()
as cleanup, which meant an unbalanced dput(). Another bug was
in the success case - gang creation incremented link count on
root directory, but that was no longer undone when gang got
destroyed.
Fix consists of
* reverting the commit in question
* adding a counter to gang, protected by ->i_rwsem
of gang directory inode.
* having it set to 1 at creation time, dropped
in both spufs_dir_close() and spufs_gang_close() and bumped
in spufs_create_context(), provided that it's not 0.
* using simple_recursive_removal() to take the gang
directory out when counter reaches zero.
Impact
CVE-2025-22072 has a CVSS score of 5.5 (Medium). The vector is requires local access, low privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. No fixed version is listed yet, so configuration controls and monitoring matter more in the interim.
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2025-22072? CVE-2025-22072 is a medium-severity security vulnerability. No fixed version is listed yet.
- How severe is CVE-2025-22072? CVE-2025-22072 has a CVSS score of 5.5 (Medium). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
- Is there a fix for CVE-2025-22072? No fixed version is listed for CVE-2025-22072 yet. Monitor the advisory for updates and apply mitigations in the interim.
- Is CVE-2025-22072 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2025-22072 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
- What actually determines whether CVE-2025-22072 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.