In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
sunrpc: init gssp_lock before publishing proc entry
create_use_gss_proxy_proc_entry() publishes /proc/net/rpc/use-gss-proxy
via proc_create_data() before init_gssp_clnt() runs mutex_init() on
sn->gssp_lock. Once the dentry is linked under proc_subdir_lock it is
immediately reachable from userspace, so a write that lands in the
window drives set_gssp_clnt() into mutex_lock() on a zero-initialized
struct mutex.
create_use_gss_proxy_proc_entry(net)
proc_create_data("use-gss-proxy", ...) /* dentry live */
init_gssp_clnt(sn)
mutex_init(&sn->gssp_lock) /* too late */
write_gssp()
set_gssp_clnt(net)
mutex_lock(&sn->gssp_lock) /* uninitialized */
gssp_rpc_create(...)
sn->gssp_clnt = clnt
mutex_unlock(&sn->gssp_lock)
The window spans only the two statements between proc_create_data()
returning and init_gssp_clnt(), so a writer reaches it only if the
registering thread is preempted there while another task is already
opening the freshly published file. register_pernet_subsys() runs in
preemptible context under pernet_ops_rwsem, so that preemption is
possible, and the window widens on auth_rpcgss module load, when the
proc entry is created for every live net namespace whose tasks are
already running. A writer that wins the race locks a zero-filled
struct mutex. On CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES the missing magic value trips a
"lock used without init" splat; on a production kernel the fast path
acquires the lock via CMPXCHG(owner, 0, current). In the latter case
a second writer that arrives before init_gssp_clnt() re-zeroes owner
can enter set_gssp_clnt() concurrently, shut down the first writer's
clnt while it is still in use, and leak the loser's clnt.
Fix by initializing sn->gssp_lock in sunrpc_init_net() so its lifetime
matches the sunrpc_net it lives in. sn->gssp_clnt is already NULL from
the kzalloc that backs net_generic storage, so the lazy helper is no
longer needed; drop init_gssp_clnt(), its prototype, and the call from
create_use_gss_proxy_proc_entry(). sunrpc.ko is a build-time
dependency of auth_rpcgss.ko, so sunrpc_init_net() has always run on
every netns before any auth_gss pernet init can publish the proc
entry.
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