In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
eventfs: Hold eventfs_mutex and SRCU when remount walks events
Commit 340f0c7067a9 ("eventfs: Update all the eventfs_inodes from the
events descriptor") had eventfs_set_attrs() recurse through ei->children
on remount. The walk only holds the rcu_read_lock() taken by
tracefs_apply_options() over tracefs_inodes, which is wrong:
- list_for_each_entry over ei->children races with the list_del_rcu()
in eventfs_remove_rec() -- LIST_POISON1 deref, same shape as
d2603279c7d6.
- eventfs_inodes are freed via call_srcu(&eventfs_srcu, ...).
rcu_read_lock() does not extend an SRCU grace period, so ti->private
can be reclaimed under the walk.
- The writes to ei->attr race with eventfs_set_attr(), which holds
eventfs_mutex.
Reproducer:
while :; do mount -o remount,uid=$((RANDOM%1000)) /sys/kernel/tracing; done &
while :; do
echo "p:kp submit_bio" > /sys/kernel/tracing/kprobe_events
echo > /sys/kernel/tracing/kprobe_events
done
Wrap the events portion of tracefs_apply_options() in
eventfs_remount_lock()/_unlock() that take eventfs_mutex and
srcu_read_lock(&eventfs_srcu). eventfs_set_attrs() doesn't sleep so the
nested rcu_read_lock() is fine; lockdep_assert_held() pins the contract.
Comment in tracefs_drop_inode() said "RCU cycle" -- it is SRCU.
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, 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