CVE Intelligence
High

CVE-2025-40362 — ceph: fix multifs mds auth caps issue

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ceph: fix multifs mds auth caps issue The mds auth caps check should also validate the fsname along with the associated caps. Not doing so would result in applying the mds auth caps of one fs on to the other fs in a multifs ceph cluster. The bug causes multiple issues w.r.t user authentication, following is one such example. Steps to Reproduce (on vstart cluster): 1. Create two file systems in a cluster, say 'fsname1' and 'fsname2' 2. Authorize read only permission to the user 'client.usr' on fs 'fsname1' $ceph fs authorize fsname1 client.usr / r 3. Authorize read and write permission to the same user 'client.usr' on fs 'fsname2' $ceph fs authorize fsname2 client.usr / rw 4. Update the keyring $ceph auth get client.usr >> ./keyring With above permssions for the user 'client.usr', following is the expectation. a. The 'client.usr' should be able to only read the contents and not allowed to create or delete files on file system 'fsname1'. b. The 'client.usr' should be able to read/write on file system 'fsname2'. But, with this bug, the 'client.usr' is allowed to read/write on file system 'fsname1'. See below. 5. Mount the file system 'fsname1' with the user 'client.usr' $sudo bin/mount.ceph usr@.fsname1=/ /kmnt_fsname1_usr/ 6. Try creating a file on file system 'fsname1' with user 'client.usr'. This should fail but passes with this bug. $touch /kmnt_fsname1_usr/file1 7. Mount the file system 'fsname1' with the user 'client.admin' and create a file. $sudo bin/mount.ceph admin@.fsname1=/ /kmnt_fsname1_admin $echo "data" > /kmnt_fsname1_admin/admin_file1 8. Try removing an existing file on file system 'fsname1' with the user 'client.usr'. This shoudn't succeed but succeeds with the bug. $rm -f /kmnt_fsname1_usr/admin_file1 For more information, please take a look at the corresponding mds/fuse patch and tests added by looking into the tracker mentioned below. v2: Fix a possible null dereference in doutc v3: Don't store fsname from mdsmap, validate against ceph_mount_options's fsname and use it v4: Code refactor, better warning message and fix possible compiler warning [ Slava.Dubeyko: "fsname check failed" -> "fsname mismatch" ]

Published Dec 16, 2025 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP, GitHub Security Advisories · CNA: Linux

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+1
  • Technical severity (high)+6

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.16%
ahead of 5% of scored CVEs · Oct 15, 2026
Affects
Linux
Linux
CVSS base
8.8
High · 3 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
None
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Total
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Linux Linux).
  2. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  3. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Linux Linux ≥ 596afb0b8933ba6ed7227adcc538db26feb25c74 and < 07640d34a781bb2e39020a39137073c03c4aa932≥ 596afb0b8933ba6ed7227adcc538db26feb25c74 and < ca3da8b27ab9a0923ad477447cfb8fc7f4b4c523≥ 596afb0b8933ba6ed7227adcc538db26feb25c74 and < 22c73d52a6d05c5a2053385c0d6cd9984732799dversion 6.10 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
8.8 CVSS 3.1 High 2.0 6.0 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67 via NIST National Vulnerability Database
8.8 CVSS 3.1 High — — GitHub, Inc. via GitHub Security Advisories
8.8 CVSS 3.1 High — — Linux via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H (score shown at the top: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67)

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 15, 2026 · 3 reading(s) · max 0.16%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Local/physical vector: focus on endpoint telemetry (EDR) from affected hosts.
endpoint telemetry (EDR)

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Affected products added · linux/linux
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 8.8
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Deferred
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • 2025
  • CVE published
    Dec 16, 2025 · Linux

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× References added · Oct 14, 2026 – Oct 14, 2026
  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

5 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Linux
every CVE for this vendor

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-99999 ipv4: validate checksum_start before completing checksum 12h
  • CVE-2026-98432 ipv4: free inet_opt and ireq_opt after an RCU grace period 12h
  • CVE-2026-98424 wifi: cfg80211: undo netns switch if renaming the wiphy fails 1d
  • CVE-2026-98425 wifi: mac80211: don't warn when an IBSS has no channel to scan 1d
  • CVE-2026-98426 wifi: mwifiex: fix IRQ leak using wrong index in MSI-X error path 1d
  • CVE-2026-98427 net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call 1d

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No CWE classification.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2025-40362 is "ceph: fix multifs mds auth caps issue", rated High. It affects Linux (Linux); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 8.8 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.16% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.