In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
tipc: fix UAF in cleanup_bearer() due to premature dst_cache_destroy()
TIPC UDP media bearer teardown calls dst_cache_destroy() on its
replicast caches before calling synchronize_net() to wait for
concurrent RCU readers (transmitters) to finish:
static void cleanup_bearer(struct work_struct *work)
{
...
list_for_each_entry_safe(rcast, tmp, &ub->rcast.list, list) {
dst_cache_destroy(&rcast->dst_cache);
list_del_rcu(&rcast->list);
kfree_rcu(rcast, rcu);
}
...
dst_cache_destroy(&ub->rcast.dst_cache);
udp_tunnel_sock_release(ub->sk);
synchronize_net();
...
}
This is highly buggy because dst_cache_destroy() immediately frees the
per-CPU cache memory (free_percpu()) and releases the cached dst
entries without any synchronization.
If a concurrent transmitter (e.g., tipc_udp_xmit()) is running on another
CPU under RCU protection, it can call dst_cache_get() concurrently,
leading to:
- Use-After-Free on the per-CPU cache pointer itself (crash).
- "rcuref - imbalanced put()" warning if it attempts to release a
dst that was concurrently released by dst_cache_destroy().
Furthermore, calling kfree(ub) immediately after synchronize_net() without
closing the socket first (or waiting after closing it) leaves a window
where a concurrent receiver (tipc_udp_recv()) could start after
synchronize_net(), access ub, and suffer a UAF when kfree(ub) runs.
To fix this, we must defer dst_cache_destroy() and kfree(ub) until after
we have ensured that no more readers can see the bearer/socket and all
existing readers have finished:
- Defer rcast entry destruction (both dst_cache_destroy() and kfree())
to an RCU callback using call_rcu_hurry().
Using call_rcu_hurry() ensures the dst entries are released quickly.
- Release the bearer socket using udp_tunnel_sock_release() (stops
new receive readers).
- Call synchronize_net() to wait for all outstanding RCU readers
(both transmit and receive) to finish.
- Now that it is safe, call dst_cache_destroy() on the main bearer
cache, and free ub.
Note: 3) and 4) can be changed later in net-next to also use
call_rcu_hurry() and get rid of the synchronize_net() latency.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.8 HIGHCVSS-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 (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (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 Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). 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