In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ocfs2: validate lengths in dlm_mig_lockres_handler
A node receiving a DLM_MIG_LOCKRES message trusts several fields of the
peer-supplied dlm_migratable_lockres without validation. num_locks and
lockname_len are bounded only on the sending side, and the message is
never checked to actually carry num_locks migratable_lock entries. As a
result dlm_process_recovery_data() walks mres->ml[0..num_locks) past the
kmalloc(data_len) copy of the message (an out-of-bounds read that ends in
a BUG_ON panic), and dlm_init_lockres() copies lockname_len bytes into the
fixed 32-byte o2dlm_lockname slab object (a heap out-of-bounds write).
Both are reachable by any node in the domain.
Validate these fields right after dlm_grab(), before anything uses them --
including the not-joined error path, which already prints mres->lockname
with the unbounded lockname_len as a %.*s precision. Reject the message
unless lockname_len <= DLM_LOCKID_NAME_MAX, num_locks <=
DLM_MAX_MIGRATABLE_LOCKS (the bound the sender already asserts), and the
payload is large enough to hold the claimed locks. Conforming recovery
and migration messages are unaffected.
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