In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: ipv6: fix NOREF dst use in seg6 and rpl lwtunnels
seg6_input_core() and rpl_input() call ip6_route_input() which sets a
NOREF dst on the skb, then pass it to dst_cache_set_ip6() invoking
dst_hold() unconditionally.
On PREEMPT_RT, ksoftirqd is preemptible and a higher-priority task can
release the underlying pcpu_rt between the lookup and the caching
through a concurrent FIB lookup on a shared nexthop.
Simplified race sequence:
ksoftirqd/X higher-prio task (same CPU X)
----------- --------------------------------
seg6_input_core(,skb)/rpl_input(skb)
dst_cache_get()
-> miss
ip6_route_input(skb)
-> ip6_pol_route(,skb,flags)
[RT6_LOOKUP_F_DST_NOREF in flags]
-> FIB lookup resolves fib6_nh
[nhid=N route]
-> rt6_make_pcpu_route()
[creates pcpu_rt, refcount=1]
pcpu_rt->sernum = fib6_sernum
[fib6_sernum=W]
-> cmpxchg(fib6_nh.rt6i_pcpu,
NULL, pcpu_rt)
[slot was empty, store succeeds]
-> skb_dst_set_noref(skb, dst)
[dst is pcpu_rt, refcount still 1]
rt_genid_bump_ipv6()
-> bumps fib6_sernum
[fib6_sernum from W to Z]
ip6_route_output()
-> ip6_pol_route()
-> FIB lookup resolves fib6_nh
[nhid=N]
-> rt6_get_pcpu_route()
pcpu_rt->sernum != fib6_sernum
[W <> Z, stale]
-> prev = xchg(rt6i_pcpu, NULL)
-> dst_release(prev)
[prev is pcpu_rt,
refcount 1->0, dead]
dst = skb_dst(skb)
[dst is the dead pcpu_rt]
dst_cache_set_ip6(dst)
-> dst_hold() on dead dst
-> WARN / use-after-free
For the race to occur, ksoftirqd must be preemptible (PREEMPT_RT without
PREEMPT_RT_NEEDS_BH_LOCK) and a concurrent task must be able to release
the pcpu_rt. Shared nexthop objects provide such a path, as two routes
pointing to the same nhid share the same fib6_nh and its rt6i_pcpu
entry.
Fix seg6_input_core() and rpl_input() by calling skb_dst_force() after
ip6_route_input() to force the NOREF dst into a refcounted one before
caching.
The output path is not affected as ip6_route_output() already returns a
refcounted dst.
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