In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
drm/amd/display: Fix dc_link NULL handling in HPD init
amdgpu_dm_hpd_init() may see connectors without a valid dc_link.
The code already checks dc_link for the polling decision, but later
unconditionally dereferences it when setting up HPD interrupts.
Assign dc_link early and skip connectors where it is NULL.
Fixes the below:
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_irq.c:940 amdgpu_dm_hpd_init()
error: we previously assumed 'dc_link' could be null (see line 931)
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_irq.c
923 /*
924 * Analog connectors may be hot-plugged unlike other connector
925 * types that don't support HPD. Only poll analog connectors.
926 */
927 use_polling |=
928 amdgpu_dm_connector->dc_link &&
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The patch adds this NULL check but hopefully it can be removed
929 dc_connector_supports_analog(amdgpu_dm_connector->dc_link->link_id.id);
930
931 dc_link = amdgpu_dm_connector->dc_link;
dc_link assigned here.
932
933 /*
934 * Get a base driver irq reference for hpd ints for the lifetime
935 * of dm. Note that only hpd interrupt types are registered with
936 * base driver; hpd_rx types aren't. IOW, amdgpu_irq_get/put on
937 * hpd_rx isn't available. DM currently controls hpd_rx
938 * explicitly with dc_interrupt_set()
939 */
--> 940 if (dc_link->irq_source_hpd != DC_IRQ_SOURCE_INVALID) {
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ If it's NULL then we are trouble because we dereference it here.
941 irq_type = dc_link->irq_source_hpd - DC_IRQ_SOURCE_HPD1;
942 /*
943 * TODO: There's a mismatch between mode_info.num_hpd
944 * and what bios reports as the # of connectors with hpd
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: 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