In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf, cpumap: Handle skb as well when clean up ptr_ring
The following warning was reported when running xdp_redirect_cpu with
both skb-mode and stress-mode enabled:
------------[ cut here ]------------
Incorrect XDP memory type (-2128176192) usage
WARNING: CPU: 7 PID: 1442 at net/core/xdp.c:405
Modules linked in:
CPU: 7 PID: 1442 Comm: kworker/7:0 Tainted: G 6.5.0-rc2+ #1
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996)
Workqueue: events __cpu_map_entry_free
RIP: 0010:__xdp_return+0x1e4/0x4a0
......
Call Trace:
? show_regs+0x65/0x70
? __warn+0xa5/0x240
? __xdp_return+0x1e4/0x4a0
......
xdp_return_frame+0x4d/0x150
__cpu_map_entry_free+0xf9/0x230
process_one_work+0x6b0/0xb80
worker_thread+0x96/0x720
kthread+0x1a5/0x1f0
ret_from_fork+0x3a/0x70
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1b/0x30
The reason for the warning is twofold. One is due to the kthread
cpu_map_kthread_run() is stopped prematurely. Another one is
__cpu_map_ring_cleanup() doesn't handle skb mode and treats skbs in
ptr_ring as XDP frames.
Prematurely-stopped kthread will be fixed by the preceding patch and
ptr_ring will be empty when __cpu_map_ring_cleanup() is called. But
as the comments in __cpu_map_ring_cleanup() said, handling and freeing
skbs in ptr_ring as well to "catch any broken behaviour gracefully".
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