In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
sched_ext: Fix incorrect autogroup migration detection
scx_move_task() is called from sched_move_task() and tells the BPF scheduler
that cgroup migration is being committed. sched_move_task() is used by both
cgroup and autogroup migrations and scx_move_task() tried to filter out
autogroup migrations by testing the destination cgroup and PF_EXITING but
this is not enough. In fact, without explicitly tagging the thread which is
doing the cgroup migration, there is no good way to tell apart
scx_move_task() invocations for racing migration to the root cgroup and an
autogroup migration.
This led to scx_move_task() incorrectly ignoring a migration from non-root
cgroup to an autogroup of the root cgroup triggering the following warning:
WARNING: CPU: 7 PID: 1 at kernel/sched/ext.c:3725 scx_cgroup_can_attach+0x196/0x340
...
Call Trace:
cgroup_migrate_execute+0x5b1/0x700
cgroup_attach_task+0x296/0x400
__cgroup_procs_write+0x128/0x140
cgroup_procs_write+0x17/0x30
kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x141/0x1f0
vfs_write+0x31d/0x4a0
__x64_sys_write+0x72/0xf0
do_syscall_64+0x82/0x160
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
Fix it by adding an argument to sched_move_task() that indicates whether the
moving is for a cgroup or autogroup migration. After the change,
scx_move_task() is called only for cgroup migrations and renamed to
scx_cgroup_move_task().
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it