In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
RDMA/ucma: Lock the handler in ucma_set_ib_path()
ucma_set_ib_path() calls ucma_event_handler() straight from the write()
path, without the handler lock that keeps ctx->file stable while a uevent
is queued. The handler re-reads ctx->file for every dereference:
mutex_lock(&ctx->file->mut); /* file A */
list_add_tail(&uevent->list, &ctx->file->event_list); /* file B */
mutex_unlock(&ctx->file->mut); /* file B */
wake_up_interruptible(&ctx->file->poll_wait); /* file B */
A concurrent ucma_migrate_id() reassigns ctx->file while the SET_OPTION
caller sleeps in mutex_lock(), so the list_add_tail() lands on file B's
event_list while only file A's mutex is held, racing every other user of
that list:
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in __list_add_valid_or_report+0x1aa/0x1c0
Read of size 8 at addr ffff888153c6a418 by task poc_corr/486
Call Trace:
__list_add_valid_or_report+0x1aa/0x1c0
ucma_event_handler+0x1be/0xc00
ucma_set_ib_path+0x45e/0x710
ucma_set_option+0x32e/0x590
ucma_write+0x1f9/0x330
Allocated by task 505:
ucma_write_cm_event+0x1a1/0x660
Freed by task 505:
kfree+0x1da/0x4c0
ucma_get_event+0x5d5/0x7e0
The freed object is a ucma_event that another thread dequeued from file B's
list under file B's mutex. File A's mut is left held on top of that,
wedging its next writer in uninterruptible sleep.
This path needs a bound and address-resolved cm_id, so it requires an RDMA
device to be present.
Take the handler lock around the call.
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