In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
netfs: Fix cancellation of a DIO and single read subrequests
When the preparation of a new subrequest for a read fails, if the
subrequest has already been added to the stream->subrequests list, it can't
simply be put and abandoned as the collector may see it. Also, if it
hasn't been queued yet, it has two outstanding refs that both need to be
put. Both DIO read and single-read dispatch fail at this; further, both
differ in the order they do things to the way buffered read works.
Fix cancellation of both DIO-read and single-read subrequests that failed
preparation by the following steps:
(1) Harmonise all three reads (buffered, dio, single) to queue the subreq
before prepping it.
(2) Make all three call netfs_queue_read() to do the queuing.
(3) Set NETFS_RREQ_ALL_QUEUED independently of the queuing as we don't
know the length of the subreq at this point.
(4) In all cases, set the error and NETFS_SREQ_FAILED flag on the subreq
and then call netfs_read_subreq_terminated() to deal with it. This
will pass responsibility off to the collector for dealing with it.
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