In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
quota: fix livelock between quotactl and freeze_super
When a filesystem is frozen, quotactl_block() enters a retry loop
waiting for the filesystem to thaw. It acquires s_umount, checks the
freeze state, drops s_umount and uses sb_start_write() - sb_end_write()
pair to wait for the unfreeze.
However, this retry loop can trigger a livelock issue, specifically on
kernels with preemption disabled.
The mechanism is as follows:
- freeze_super() sets SB_FREEZE_WRITE and calls sb_wait_write().
- sb_wait_write() calls percpu_down_write(), which initiates
synchronize_rcu().
- Simultaneously, quotactl_block() spins in its retry loop, immediately
executing the sb_start_write() - sb_end_write() pair.
- Because the kernel is non-preemptible and the loop contains no
scheduling points, quotactl_block() never yields the CPU. This
prevents that CPU from reaching an RCU quiescent state.
- synchronize_rcu() in the freezer thread waits indefinitely for the
quotactl_block() CPU to report a quiescent state.
- quotactl_block() spins indefinitely waiting for the freezer to
advance, which it cannot do as it is blocked on the RCU sync.
This results in a hang of the freezer process and 100% CPU usage by the
quota process.
While this can occur intermittently on multi-core systems, it is
reliably reproducing on a node with the following script, running both
the freezer and the quota toggle on the same CPU:
# mkfs.ext4 -O quota /dev/sda 2g && mkdir a_mount
# mount /dev/sda -o quota,usrquota,grpquota a_mount
# taskset -c 3 bash -c "while true; do xfs_freeze -f a_mount; \
xfs_freeze -u a_mount; done" &
# taskset -c 3 bash -c "while true; do quotaon a_mount; \
quotaoff a_mount; done" &
Adding cond_resched() to the retry loop fixes the issue. It acts as an
RCU quiescent state, allowing synchronize_rcu() in percpu_down_write()
to complete.
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
- 0.2% 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 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.
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