In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
nfsd: RCU-protect cl_cb_session to fix use-after-free on session teardown
After a DESTROY_SESSION the per-session teardown path can free a
session while rpciod still holds an inflight callback rpc_task that
dereferences clp->cl_cb_session. nfsd4_probe_callback_sync() flushes
cl_callback_wq, but once nfsd4_run_cb_work() has called
rpc_call_async() the rpc_task lives on rpciod; flushing the workqueue
does not wait for it. rpc_shutdown_client() does drain rpciod tasks,
but uses a 1-second wait_event_timeout — tasks stuck in rpc_delay()
(e.g. 2-second NFS4ERR_DELAY retries) can outlive the drain.
destroy path rpciod
------------ ------
unhash_session(ses)
nfsd4_probe_callback_sync(clp)
flush_workqueue(cl_callback_wq)
/* returns; rpc_task still live */
nfsd4_put_session_locked(ses)
free_session(ses) -> kfree(ses)
nfsd4_cb_sequence_done()
reads cb_clp->cl_cb_session
/* freed slab */
A second window exists in nfsd4_process_cb_update(). When
__nfsd4_find_backchannel() returns NULL because unhash_session() has
already removed the destroyed session from cl_sessions,
setup_callback_client() takes the v4.1 early return so
clp->cl_cb_session = ses never fires and the field retains a pointer
to the about-to-be-freed session.
Fix both by converting cl_cb_session to an RCU-protected pointer:
- Move the cl_cb_session = ses assignment in setup_callback_client()
to after rpc_create() succeeds, so it is only published when a
working backchannel exists. Clear cl_cb_session on the error
return in nfsd4_process_cb_update(). Both stores use
rcu_assign_pointer().
- Annotate cl_cb_session with __rcu. All rpciod-side readers use
rcu_read_lock()/rcu_dereference() and check for NULL, bailing to
the appropriate error or requeue path:
encode_cb_sequence4args(), decode_cb_sequence4resok(),
nfsd41_cb_get_slot(), nfsd41_cb_release_slot(),
nfsd4_cb_prepare(), and nfsd4_cb_sequence_done().
- Switch __free_session() from kfree() to kfree_rcu() so the
session slab is not reclaimed until after an RCU grace period,
guaranteeing that rpciod readers inside rcu_read_lock() never
dereference freed memory.
- Pass the session pointer to the nfsd_cb_seq_status and
nfsd_cb_free_slot tracepoints instead of having them re-read
cl_cb_session.
- nfsd4_cb_prepare() calls rpc_exit() when the session is NULL,
routing through the done/release path to requeue the callback.
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