In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
cifs: clear tcon after cifsFileInfo_put() in cifs_file_set_size()
When the else branch of cifs_file_set_size() finds a writable file handle
via find_writable_file(), it borrows tcon and server from the handle's
tlink, attempts the handle-based set_file_size() RPC, and then releases
the handle with cifsFileInfo_put().
If set_file_size() fails, execution falls through to the path-based
fallback, which reuses the borrowed tcon and server under the
"if (tcon == NULL)" guard. Since tcon is not NULL at that point, the
guard is skipped. If cifsFileInfo_put() dropped the last reference on a
tlink that was already removed from the tlink tree (TCON_LINK_IN_TREE
cleared, as happens during reconnection or session teardown),
cifs_put_tlink() will have freed tcon; the subsequent set_path_size()
call is then a use-after-free.
Setting tcon = NULL after cifsFileInfo_put() causes the existing guard
to take the cifs_sb_tlink() path, which acquires a fresh reference for
the path-based operation or fails cleanly if the session is gone.
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