In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
io_uring/io-wq: Use set_bit() and test_bit() at worker->flags
Utilize set_bit() and test_bit() on worker->flags within io_uring/io-wq
to address potential data races.
The structure io_worker->flags may be accessed through various data
paths, leading to concurrency issues. When KCSAN is enabled, it reveals
data races occurring in io_worker_handle_work and
io_wq_activate_free_worker functions.
BUG: KCSAN: data-race in io_worker_handle_work / io_wq_activate_free_worker
write to 0xffff8885c4246404 of 4 bytes by task 49071 on cpu 28:
io_worker_handle_work (io_uring/io-wq.c:434 io_uring/io-wq.c:569)
io_wq_worker (io_uring/io-wq.c:?)
read to 0xffff8885c4246404 of 4 bytes by task 49024 on cpu 5:
io_wq_activate_free_worker (io_uring/io-wq.c:? io_uring/io-wq.c:285)
io_wq_enqueue (io_uring/io-wq.c:947)
io_queue_iowq (io_uring/io_uring.c:524)
io_req_task_submit (io_uring/io_uring.c:1511)
io_handle_tw_list (io_uring/io_uring.c:1198)
Line numbers against commit 18daea77cca6 ("Merge tag 'for-linus' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm").
These races involve writes and reads to the same memory location by
different tasks running on different CPUs. To mitigate this, refactor
the code to use atomic operations such as set_bit(), test_bit(), and
clear_bit() instead of basic "and" and "or" operations. This ensures
thread-safe manipulation of worker flags.
Also, move create_index to avoid holes in the structure.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (4.7): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 4.7 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 4.7 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 every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 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 every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (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)60 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 partial (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