In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
rust_binder: call set_notification_done() without proc lock
Consider the following sequence of events on a death listener:
- The remote process dies and sends a BR_DEAD_BINDER message.
- The local process invokes the BC_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION command.
- The local process then invokes the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE.
Then, the kernel will reply to the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE command with a
BR_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION_DONE reply using push_work_if_looper().
However, this can result in a deadlock if the current thread is not a
looper. This is because dead_binder_done() still holds the proc lock
during set_notification_done(), which called push_work_if_looper().
Normally, push_work_if_looper() takes the thread lock, which is fine to
take under the proc lock. But if the current thread is not a looper,
then it falls back to delivering the reply to the process work queue,
which involves taking the proc lock. Since the proc lock is already
held, this is a deadlock.
Fix this by releasing the proc lock during set_notification_done(). It
was not intentional that it was held during that function to begin with.
I don't think this ever happens in Android because BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE
is only invoked in response to BR_DEAD_BINDER messages, and the kernel
always delivers BR_DEAD_BINDER to a looper. So there's no scenario where
Android userspace will call BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE on a non-looper thread.
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: 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.
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