In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ip6: vti: Use ip6_tnl.net in vti6_siocdevprivate().
After patch 1/2 in this series, vti6_update() unlinks and relinks
the tunnel through t->net. vti6_siocdevprivate() still uses
dev_net(dev) for the collision lookup. For a tunnel moved through
IFLA_NET_NS_FD, dev_net(dev) is the new netns, not t->net.
SIOCCHGTUNNEL on a migrated tunnel then runs:
net = dev_net(dev) /* migrated netns */
t = vti6_locate(net, &p1, false) /* misses target in t->net */
...
t = netdev_priv(dev)
vti6_update(t, &p1, false) /* mutates t->net's hash */
A caller in the migrated netns picks params that match a tunnel
in the creation netns. The lookup in dev_net(dev) finds nothing.
vti6_update() prepends the migrated tunnel at the head of the
creation netns hash bucket for those params. Later lookups in
the creation netns resolve to the migrated device. xfrm receive
delivers the matched packets through a device the caller controls.
Reachable from an unprivileged user namespace (unshare --user
--map-root-user --net). Cross tenant scope on container hosts.
Switch the SIOCCHGTUNNEL path on a non fallback device to use
t->net for the lookup. The lookup now matches the netns
vti6_update() operates on.
Also add ns_capable(self->net->user_ns, CAP_NET_ADMIN) before
the lookup. The check at the top of the case is against
dev_net(dev)->user_ns, which after migration is the attacker's
netns. A caller there can pick params absent from self->net,
the lookup returns NULL, t becomes self, and vti6_update()
inserts the device into the creation netns hash. The new check
requires CAP_NET_ADMIN in the creation netns user_ns too.
SIOCADDTUNNEL and SIOCCHGTUNNEL on the fallback device keep
dev_net(dev), which equals init_net there.
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