In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
acpi: typec: ucsi: Introduce a ->poll_cci method
For the ACPI backend of UCSI the UCSI "registers" are just a memory copy
of the register values in an opregion. The ACPI implementation in the
BIOS ensures that the opregion contents are synced to the embedded
controller and it ensures that the registers (in particular CCI) are
synced back to the opregion on notifications. While there is an ACPI call
that syncs the actual registers to the opregion there is rarely a need to
do this and on some ACPI implementations it actually breaks in various
interesting ways.
The only reason to force a sync from the embedded controller is to poll
CCI while notifications are disabled. Only the ucsi core knows if this
is the case and guessing based on the current command is suboptimal, i.e.
leading to the following spurious assertion splat:
WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 76 at drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ucsi.c:1388 ucsi_reset_ppm+0x1b4/0x1c0 [typec_ucsi]
CPU: 3 UID: 0 PID: 76 Comm: kworker/3:0 Not tainted 6.12.11-200.fc41.x86_64 #1
Hardware name: LENOVO 21D0/LNVNB161216, BIOS J6CN45WW 03/17/2023
Workqueue: events_long ucsi_init_work [typec_ucsi]
RIP: 0010:ucsi_reset_ppm+0x1b4/0x1c0 [typec_ucsi]
Call Trace:
ucsi_init_work+0x3c/0xac0 [typec_ucsi]
process_one_work+0x179/0x330
worker_thread+0x252/0x390
kthread+0xd2/0x100
ret_from_fork+0x34/0x50
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
Thus introduce a ->poll_cci() method that works like ->read_cci() with an
additional forced sync and document that this should be used when polling
with notifications disabled. For all other backends that presumably don't
have this issue use the same implementation for both methods.
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