In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
dm: limit swapping tables for devices with zone write plugs
dm_revalidate_zones() only allowed new or previously unzoned devices to
call blk_revalidate_disk_zones(). If the device was already zoned,
disk->nr_zones would always equal md->nr_zones, so dm_revalidate_zones()
returned without doing any work. This would make the zoned settings for
the device not match the new table. If the device had zone write plug
resources, it could run into errors like bdev_zone_is_seq() reading
invalid memory because disk->conv_zones_bitmap was the wrong size.
If the device doesn't have any zone write plug resources, calling
blk_revalidate_disk_zones() will always correctly update device. If
blk_revalidate_disk_zones() fails, it can still overwrite or clear the
current disk->nr_zones value. In this case, DM must restore the previous
value of disk->nr_zones, so that the zoned settings will continue to
match the previous value that it fell back to.
If the device already has zone write plug resources,
blk_revalidate_disk_zones() will not correctly update them, if it is
called for arbitrary zoned device changes. Since there is not much need
for this ability, the easiest solution is to disallow any table reloads
that change the zoned settings, for devices that already have zone plug
resources. Specifically, if a device already has zone plug resources
allocated, it can only switch to another zoned table that also emulates
zone append. Also, it cannot change the device size or the zone size. A
device can switch to an error target.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
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.
The score's inputs: 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