In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
tcp: fix stale per-CPU tcp_tw_isn leak enabling ISN prediction
Blamed commit moved the TIME_WAIT-derived ISN from the skb control
block to a per-CPU variable, assuming the value would always be consumed
by tcp_conn_request() for the same packet that wrote it. That assumption
is violated by multiple drop paths between the producer
(__this_cpu_write(tcp_tw_isn, isn) in tcp_v{4,6}_rcv()) and the consumer
(tcp_conn_request()):
- min_ttl / min_hopcount check
- xfrm policy check
- tcp_inbound_hash() MD5/AO mismatch
- tcp_filter() eBPF/SO_ATTACH_FILTER drop
- th->syn && th->fin discard in tcp_rcv_state_process() TCP_LISTEN
- psp_sk_rx_policy_check() in tcp_v{4,6}_do_rcv()
- tcp_checksum_complete() in tcp_v{4,6}_do_rcv()
- tcp_v{4,6}_cookie_check() returning NULL
When a packet is dropped on any of these paths, tcp_tw_isn is left set.
The next SYN processed on the same CPU then consumes the non zero value in
tcp_conn_request(), receiving a potentially predictable ISN.
This patch moves back tcp_tw_isn to skb->cb[], getting rid of the per-cpu
variable.
Note that tcp_v{4,6}_fill_cb() do not set it.
Very litle impact on overall code size/complexity:
$ scripts/bloat-o-meter -t vmlinux.old vmlinux.new
add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 2/1 up/down: 8/-15 (-7)
Function old new delta
tcp_v6_rcv 3038 3042 +4
tcp_v4_rcv 3035 3039 +4
tcp_conn_request 2938 2923 -15
Total: Before=24436060, After=24436053, chg -0.00%
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