In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
fs: writeback: fix use-after-free in __mark_inode_dirty()
An use-after-free issue occurred when __mark_inode_dirty() get the
bdi_writeback that was in the progress of switching.
CPU: 1 PID: 562 Comm: systemd-random- Not tainted 6.6.56-gb4403bd46a8e #1
......
pstate: 60400005 (nZCv daif +PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
pc : __mark_inode_dirty+0x124/0x418
lr : __mark_inode_dirty+0x118/0x418
sp : ffffffc08c9dbbc0
........
Call trace:
__mark_inode_dirty+0x124/0x418
generic_update_time+0x4c/0x60
file_modified+0xcc/0xd0
ext4_buffered_write_iter+0x58/0x124
ext4_file_write_iter+0x54/0x704
vfs_write+0x1c0/0x308
ksys_write+0x74/0x10c
__arm64_sys_write+0x1c/0x28
invoke_syscall+0x48/0x114
el0_svc_common.constprop.0+0xc0/0xe0
do_el0_svc+0x1c/0x28
el0_svc+0x40/0xe4
el0t_64_sync_handler+0x120/0x12c
el0t_64_sync+0x194/0x198
Root cause is:
systemd-random-seed kworker
----------------------------------------------------------------------
___mark_inode_dirty inode_switch_wbs_work_fn
spin_lock(&inode->i_lock);
inode_attach_wb
locked_inode_to_wb_and_lock_list
get inode->i_wb
spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock);
spin_lock(&wb->list_lock)
spin_lock(&inode->i_lock)
inode_io_list_move_locked
spin_unlock(&wb->list_lock)
spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock)
spin_lock(&old_wb->list_lock)
inode_do_switch_wbs
spin_lock(&inode->i_lock)
inode->i_wb = new_wb
spin_unlock(&inode->i_lock)
spin_unlock(&old_wb->list_lock)
wb_put_many(old_wb, nr_switched)
cgwb_release
old wb released
wb_wakeup_delayed() accesses wb,
then trigger the use-after-free
issue
Fix this race condition by holding inode spinlock until
wb_wakeup_delayed() finished.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation public PoC (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