CVE-2025-40118

CVE-2025-40118 is a security vulnerability that is still awaiting full analysis and scoring. It is not currently listed as actively exploited by CISA, and its EPSS exploit-prediction score is low.

Key facts

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: pm80xx: Fix array-index-out-of-of-bounds on rmmod Since commit f7b705c238d1 ("scsi: pm80xx: Set phy_attached to zero when device is gone") UBSAN reports: UBSAN: array-index-out-of-bounds in drivers/scsi/pm8001/pm8001_sas.c:786:17 index 28 is out of range for type 'pm8001_phy [16]' on rmmod when using an expander. For a direct attached device, attached_phy contains the local phy id. For a device behind an expander, attached_phy contains the remote phy id, not the local phy id. I.e. while pm8001_ha will have pm8001_ha->chip->n_phy local phys, for a device behind an expander, attached_phy can be much larger than pm8001_ha->chip->n_phy (depending on the amount of phys of the expander). E.g. on my system pm8001_ha has 8 phys with phy ids 0-7. One of the ports has an expander connected. The expander has 31 phys with phy ids 0-30. The pm8001_ha->phy array only contains the phys of the HBA. It does not contain the phys of the expander. Thus, it is wrong to use attached_phy to index the pm8001_ha->phy array for a device behind an expander. Thus, we can only clear phy_attached for devices that are directly attached.

Frequently asked questions

What is CVE-2025-40118?
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: pm80xx: Fix array-index-out-of-of-bounds on rmmod Since commit f7b705c238d1 ("scsi: pm80xx: Set phy_attached to zero when device is gone") UBSAN reports: UBSAN: array-index-out-of-bounds in drivers/scsi/pm8001/pm8001_sas.c:786:17 index 28 is out of range for type 'pm8001_phy [16]' on rmmod when using an expander. For a direct attached device, attached_phy contains the local phy id. For a device behind an expander, attached_phy contains the remote phy id, not the local phy id. I.e. while pm8001_ha will have pm8001_ha->chip->n_phy local phys, for a device behind an expander, attached_phy can be much larger than pm8001_ha->chip->n_phy (depending on the amount of phys of the expander). E.g. on my system pm8001_ha has 8 phys with phy ids 0-7. One of the ports has an expander connected. The expander has 31 phys with phy ids 0-30. The pm8001_ha->phy array only contains the phys of the HBA. It does not contain the phys of the expander. Thus, it is wrong to use attached_phy to index the pm8001_ha->phy array for a device behind an expander. Thus, we can only clear phy_attached for devices that are directly attached.
Is CVE-2025-40118 being actively exploited?
It is not currently listed in CISA's KEV catalog. Its EPSS exploit-prediction score is 0% (9th percentile), an estimate of the probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.
How do I fix CVE-2025-40118?
Review the linked vendor and NVD advisories for patched versions and mitigations, then upgrade or apply the recommended workaround.
Does CVE-2025-40118 have an EU (EUVD) identifier?
Yes. CVE-2025-40118 is tracked in the ENISA EU Vulnerability Database (EUVD) as EUVD-2025-124965.
When was CVE-2025-40118 published?
CVE-2025-40118 was published on 2025-11-12 and last updated on 2026-06-17.

References