In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ip6_tunnel: use skb_cow_head() in ip6_tnl_xmit()
ip6_tnl_xmit() may need to expand headroom before it can push the
outer IPv6 and optional encap headers. It currently does that with
skb_realloc_headroom(), copies skb->sk ownership, consumes the original
skb, and then continues processing with the replacement skb kept only in
its local variable.
That is safe only if the helper cannot fail afterwards. But this helper
still has post-reallocation error exits. collect_md tunnels reject
non-NONE encap after the replacement, and ip6_tnl_encap() can also fail
later. In those cases the helper returns an error to its callers while
the caller still only has the original skb pointer.
Both ip6_tnl_start_xmit() and the IPv6 GRE paths free the caller skb on
error, so they can end up freeing an skb that ip6_tnl_xmit() already
consumed.
Use skb_cow_head() instead. It provides the required headroom and
writability without privately replacing the caller-owned skb, so later
error returns cannot leave callers with a stale pointer.
The Ethernet users, ip6gretap and ip6erspan, clear IFF_TX_SKB_SHARING
and already call skb_cow_head() before entering ip6_tnl_xmit(). They do
not rely on the removed skb_shared() reallocation. This also makes the
IPv6 tunnel path consistent with ip_tunnel_xmit().
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