In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
drm/i915/hwmon: Get rid of devm
When both hwmon and hwmon drvdata (on which hwmon depends) are device
managed resources, the expectation, on device unbind, is that hwmon will be
released before drvdata. However, in i915 there are two separate code
paths, which both release either drvdata or hwmon and either can be
released before the other. These code paths (for device unbind) are as
follows (see also the bug referenced below):
Call Trace:
release_nodes+0x11/0x70
devres_release_group+0xb2/0x110
component_unbind_all+0x8d/0xa0
component_del+0xa5/0x140
intel_pxp_tee_component_fini+0x29/0x40 [i915]
intel_pxp_fini+0x33/0x80 [i915]
i915_driver_remove+0x4c/0x120 [i915]
i915_pci_remove+0x19/0x30 [i915]
pci_device_remove+0x32/0xa0
device_release_driver_internal+0x19c/0x200
unbind_store+0x9c/0xb0
and
Call Trace:
release_nodes+0x11/0x70
devres_release_all+0x8a/0xc0
device_unbind_cleanup+0x9/0x70
device_release_driver_internal+0x1c1/0x200
unbind_store+0x9c/0xb0
This means that in i915, if use devm, we cannot gurantee that hwmon will
always be released before drvdata. Which means that we have a uaf if hwmon
sysfs is accessed when drvdata has been released but hwmon hasn't.
The only way out of this seems to be do get rid of devm_ and release/free
everything explicitly during device unbind.
v2: Change commit message and other minor code changes
v3: Cleanup from i915_hwmon_register on error (Armin Wolf)
v4: Eliminate potential static analyzer warning (Rodrigo)
Eliminate fetch_and_zero (Jani)
v5: Restore previous logic for ddat_gt->hwmon_dev error return (Andi)
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.8 HIGHCVSS-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 (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (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 Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). 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