In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: tls: fix off-by-one in sg_chain entry count for wrapped sk_msg ring
When an sk_msg scatterlist ring wraps (sg.end < sg.start),
tls_push_record() chains the tail portion of the ring to the head
using sg_chain(). An extra entry in the sg array is reserved for
this:
struct sk_msg_sg {
[...]
/* The extra two elements:
* 1) used for chaining the front and sections when the list becomes
* partitioned (e.g. end < start). The crypto APIs require the
* chaining;
* 2) to chain tailer SG entries after the message.
*/
struct scatterlist data[MAX_MSG_FRAGS + 2];
The current code uses MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 1 as the ring size:
sg_chain(&msg_pl->sg.data[msg_pl->sg.start],
MAX_SKB_FRAGS - msg_pl->sg.start + 1,
msg_pl->sg.data);
This places the chain pointer at
sg_chain(data[start], (MAX_SKB_FRAGS - msg_start + 1) .. =
&data[start] + (MAX_SKB_FRAGS - msg_start + 1) - 1 =
data[start + (MAX_SKB_FRAGS - start + 1) - 1] =
data[MAX_SKB_FRAGS]
instead of the true last entry. This is likely due to a "race" of
the commit under Fixes landing close to
commit 031097d9e079 ("bpf: sk_msg, zap ingress queue on psock down")
Convert to ARRAY_SIZE and drop the data[start] / - start (as suggested
by Sabrina).
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