In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
mm/damon/core: avoid use of half-online-committed context
One major usage of damon_call() is online DAMON parameters update. It is
done by calling damon_commit_ctx() inside the damon_call() callback
function. damon_commit_ctx() can fail for two reasons: 1) invalid
parameters and 2) internal memory allocation failures. In case of
failures, the damon_ctx that attempted to be updated (commit destination)
can be partially updated (or, corrupted from a perspective), and therefore
shouldn't be used anymore. The function only ensures the damon_ctx object
can safely deallocated using damon_destroy_ctx().
The API callers are, however, calling damon_commit_ctx() only after
asserting the parameters are valid, to avoid damon_commit_ctx() fails due
to invalid input parameters. But it can still theoretically fail if the
internal memory allocation fails. In the case, DAMON may run with the
partially updated damon_ctx. This can result in unexpected behaviors
including even NULL pointer dereference in case of damos_commit_dests()
failure [1]. Such allocation failure is arguably too small to fail, so
the real world impact would be rare. But, given the bad consequence, this
needs to be fixed.
Avoid such partially-committed (maybe-corrupted) damon_ctx use by saving
the damon_commit_ctx() failure on the damon_ctx object. For this,
introduce damon_ctx->maybe_corrupted field. damon_commit_ctx() sets it
when it is failed. kdamond_call() checks if the field is set after each
damon_call_control->fn() is executed. If it is set, ignore remaining
callback requests and return. All kdamond_call() callers including
kdamond_fn() also check the maybe_corrupted field right after
kdamond_call() invocations. If the field is set, break the kdamond_fn()
main loop so that DAMON sill doesn't use the context that might be
corrupted.
[[email protected]: let kdamond_call() with cancel regardless of maybe_corrupted]
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