CVE-2025-71079
net: nfc: fix deadlock between nfc_unregister_device and rfkill_fop_write
Description
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.
INFO
Published Date :
Jan. 13, 2026, 4:16 p.m.
Last Modified :
Jan. 13, 2026, 4:16 p.m.
Remotely Exploit :
No
Source :
416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
Solution
- Move rfkill_unregister() and rfkill_destroy() outside device_lock.
- Store rfkill pointer locally before releasing device lock.
- Call rfkill_unregister() after releasing device_lock.
- Apply the kernel patch to fix the deadlock.
References to Advisories, Solutions, and Tools
Here, you will find a curated list of external links that provide in-depth
information, practical solutions, and valuable tools related to
CVE-2025-71079.
CWE - Common Weakness Enumeration
While CVE identifies
specific instances of vulnerabilities, CWE categorizes the common flaws or
weaknesses that can lead to vulnerabilities. CVE-2025-71079 is
associated with the following CWEs:
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification
(CAPEC)
stores attack patterns, which are descriptions of the common attributes and
approaches employed by adversaries to exploit the CVE-2025-71079
weaknesses.
We scan GitHub repositories to detect new proof-of-concept exploits. Following list is a collection of public exploits and proof-of-concepts, which have been published on GitHub (sorted by the most recently updated).
Results are limited to the first 15 repositories due to potential performance issues.
The following list is the news that have been mention
CVE-2025-71079 vulnerability anywhere in the article.
The following table lists the changes that have been made to the
CVE-2025-71079 vulnerability over time.
Vulnerability history details can be useful for understanding the evolution of a vulnerability, and for identifying the most recent changes that may impact the vulnerability's severity, exploitability, or other characteristics.
-
New CVE Received by 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
Jan. 13, 2026
Action Type Old Value New Value Added Description 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. Added Reference https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1ab526d97a57e44d26fadcc0e9adeb9c0c0182f5 Added Reference https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/6b93c8ab6f6cda8818983a4ae3fcf84b023037b4 Added Reference https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/8fc4632fb508432895430cd02b38086bdd649083 Added Reference https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ee41f4f3ccf8cd6ba3732e867abbec7e6d8d12e5 Added Reference https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f3a8a7c1aa278f2378b2f3a10500c6674dffdfda