In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
NFSD: check truncate permission under inode lock
nfsd_setattr() checks whether a size update needs NFSD_MAY_TRUNC
before it takes inode_lock(). The comparison uses the file size sampled
by that unlocked read, but the actual ATTR_SIZE update is applied later
under inode_lock() by notify_change().
This leaves a TOCTOU window for append-only files. If a client sends a
SETATTR that does not shrink the file at the time of the unlocked
sample, a concurrent append can extend the file before nfsd_setattr()
takes inode_lock(). notify_change() then applies a real truncation
without the NFSD_MAY_TRUNC check that rejects IS_APPEND(inode). The VFS
truncate syscall paths perform their own append-only checks before
calling notify_change(), so NFSD must make this decision against the
locked size it is about to change.
Split the write-count acquisition from the truncation permission check.
Keep get_write_access() before the locked setattr work, then recheck
whether the requested size is below i_size_read(inode) after inode_lock()
has been acquired and before notify_change(ATTR_SIZE). This also avoids
the plain unlocked inode->i_size load.
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