In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
r6040: Fix kmemleak in probe and remove
There is a memory leaks reported by kmemleak:
unreferenced object 0xffff888116111000 (size 2048):
comm "modprobe", pid 817, jiffies 4294759745 (age 76.502s)
hex dump (first 32 bytes):
00 c4 0a 04 81 88 ff ff 08 10 11 16 81 88 ff ff ................
08 10 11 16 81 88 ff ff 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
backtrace:
[] kmalloc_trace+0x22/0x60
[] phy_device_create+0x4e/0x90
[] get_phy_device+0xd2/0x220
[] mdiobus_scan+0xa4/0x2e0
[] __mdiobus_register+0x482/0x8b0
[] r6040_init_one+0x714/0xd2c [r6040]
...
The problem occurs in probe process as follows:
r6040_init_one:
mdiobus_register
mdiobus_scan <- alloc and register phy_device,
the reference count of phy_device is 3
r6040_mii_probe
phy_connect <- connect to the first phy_device,
so the reference count of the first
phy_device is 4, others are 3
register_netdev <- fault inject succeeded, goto error handling path
// error handling path
err_out_mdio_unregister:
mdiobus_unregister(lp->mii_bus);
err_out_mdio:
mdiobus_free(lp->mii_bus); <- the reference count of the first
phy_device is 1, it is not released
and other phy_devices are released
// similarly, the remove process also has the same problem
The root cause is traced to the phy_device is not disconnected when
removes one r6040 device in r6040_remove_one() or on error handling path
after r6040_mii probed successfully. In r6040_mii_probe(), a net ethernet
device is connected to the first PHY device of mii_bus, in order to
notify the connected driver when the link status changes, which is the
default behavior of the PHY infrastructure to handle everything.
Therefore the phy_device should be disconnected when removes one r6040
device or on error handling path.
Fix it by adding phy_disconnect() when removes one r6040 device or on
error handling path after r6040_mii probed successfully.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
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.
The score's inputs: 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