In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
KVM: x86/mmu: Drop/zap existing present SPTE even when creating an MMIO SPTE
When installing an emulated MMIO SPTE, do so *after* dropping/zapping the
existing SPTE (if it's shadow-present). While commit a54aa15c6bda3 was
right about it being impossible to convert a shadow-present SPTE to an
MMIO SPTE due to a _guest_ write, it failed to account for writes to guest
memory that are outside the scope of KVM.
E.g. if host userspace modifies a shadowed gPTE to switch from a memslot
to emulted MMIO and then the guest hits a relevant page fault, KVM will
install the MMIO SPTE without first zapping the shadow-present SPTE.
------------[ cut here ]------------
is_shadow_present_pte(*sptep)
WARNING: arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c:484 at mark_mmio_spte+0xb2/0xc0 [kvm], CPU#0: vmx_ept_stale_r/4292
Modules linked in: kvm_intel kvm irqbypass
CPU: 0 UID: 1000 PID: 4292 Comm: vmx_ept_stale_r Not tainted 7.0.0-rc2-eafebd2d2ab0-sink-vm #319 PREEMPT
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 0.0.0 02/06/2015
RIP: 0010:mark_mmio_spte+0xb2/0xc0 [kvm]
Call Trace:
mmu_set_spte+0x237/0x440 [kvm]
ept_page_fault+0x535/0x7f0 [kvm]
kvm_mmu_do_page_fault+0xee/0x1f0 [kvm]
kvm_mmu_page_fault+0x8d/0x620 [kvm]
vmx_handle_exit+0x18c/0x5a0 [kvm_intel]
kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run+0xc55/0x1c20 [kvm]
kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x2d5/0x980 [kvm]
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x8a/0xd0
do_syscall_64+0xb5/0x730
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53
RIP: 0033:0x47fa3f
---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
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