In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
wifi: mwifiex: Detach sync cmd buffer on interrupted wait
mwifiex synchronous commands keep the caller-provided data buffer in
cmd_node->data_buf. Several callers pass stack-allocated objects there.
If wait_event_interruptible_timeout() is interrupted, the caller can
return and release that stack object while the firmware command is still
the current command. A late firmware response then reaches the normal
response handler, which can copy data through cmd_node->data_buf into the
stale stack address.
This fixes a stack corruption observed during repeated association and
disassociation cycles. The panic trace showed the command wait being
interrupted immediately before a bad pointer dereference:
cmd_wait_q terminated: -512
Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 002c583837384662
Kernel panic - not syncing: stack-protector: Kernel stack is corrupted
...
Tainted: [M]=MACHINE_CHECK
The fault address decodes as little-endian ASCII:
0x002c583837384662 -> "bF878X,\0"
which is a fragment of the VERSION_EXT firmware string exposed as
debugfs "verext":
w8997o-V4, RF878X, FP92, 16.92.21.p153.7
The same runs also showed corrupted control data containing:
0x2400372e333531 -> "153.7\0$"
which is the tail of the same VERSION_EXT string. This points at a late
VERSION_EXT response writing through a stale stack-backed data_buf after
the interrupted wait returned.
After cancelling pending commands on an interrupted or timed-out wait,
detach the caller-owned data buffer from the still-current command. This
preserves the existing command cancellation behaviour while preventing a
late response from writing through a pointer whose lifetime ended with the
waiting caller.
Tested on an i.MX8MP board using an 88W8997.
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