In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
soundwire: Revert "soundwire: qcom: Add set_channel_map api support"
This reverts commit 7796c97df6b1b2206681a07f3c80f6023a6593d5.
This patch broke Dragonboard 845c (sdm845). I see:
Unexpected kernel BRK exception at EL1
Internal error: BRK handler: 00000000f20003e8 [#1] SMP
pc : qcom_swrm_set_channel_map+0x7c/0x80 [soundwire_qcom]
lr : snd_soc_dai_set_channel_map+0x34/0x78
Call trace:
qcom_swrm_set_channel_map+0x7c/0x80 [soundwire_qcom] (P)
sdm845_dai_init+0x18c/0x2e0 [snd_soc_sdm845]
snd_soc_link_init+0x28/0x6c
snd_soc_bind_card+0x5f4/0xb0c
snd_soc_register_card+0x148/0x1a4
devm_snd_soc_register_card+0x50/0xb0
sdm845_snd_platform_probe+0x124/0x148 [snd_soc_sdm845]
platform_probe+0x6c/0xd0
really_probe+0xc0/0x2a4
__driver_probe_device+0x7c/0x130
driver_probe_device+0x40/0x118
__device_attach_driver+0xc4/0x108
bus_for_each_drv+0x8c/0xf0
__device_attach+0xa4/0x198
device_initial_probe+0x18/0x28
bus_probe_device+0xb8/0xbc
deferred_probe_work_func+0xac/0xfc
process_one_work+0x244/0x658
worker_thread+0x1b4/0x360
kthread+0x148/0x228
ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
Kernel panic - not syncing: BRK handler: Fatal exception
Dan has also reported following issues with the original patch
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
Bug #1:
The zeroeth element of ctrl->pconfig[] is supposed to be unused. We
start counting at 1. However this code sets ctrl->pconfig[0].ch_mask = 128.
Bug #2:
There are SLIM_MAX_TX_PORTS (16) elements in tx_ch[] array but only
QCOM_SDW_MAX_PORTS + 1 (15) in the ctrl->pconfig[] array so it corrupts
memory like Yongqin Liu pointed out.
Bug 3:
Like Jie Gan pointed out, it erases all the tx information with the rx
information.
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
- 0.1% 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 fixed version is listed under Patch Availability. 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