In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: restrict SO_REUSEPORT to inet sockets
After blamed commit, crypto sockets could accidentally be destroyed
from RCU call back, as spotted by zyzbot [1].
Trying to acquire a mutex in RCU callback is not allowed.
Restrict SO_REUSEPORT socket option to inet sockets.
v1 of this patch supported TCP, UDP and SCTP sockets,
but fcnal-test.sh test needed RAW and ICMP support.
[1]
BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/mutex.c:562
in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 24, name: ksoftirqd/1
preempt_count: 100, expected: 0
RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0
1 lock held by ksoftirqd/1/24:
#0: ffffffff8e937ba0 (rcu_callback){....}-{0:0}, at: rcu_lock_acquire include/linux/rcupdate.h:337 [inline]
#0: ffffffff8e937ba0 (rcu_callback){....}-{0:0}, at: rcu_do_batch kernel/rcu/tree.c:2561 [inline]
#0: ffffffff8e937ba0 (rcu_callback){....}-{0:0}, at: rcu_core+0xa37/0x17a0 kernel/rcu/tree.c:2823
Preemption disabled at:
[] softirq_handle_begin kernel/softirq.c:402 [inline]
[] handle_softirqs+0x128/0x9b0 kernel/softirq.c:537
CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 24 Comm: ksoftirqd/1 Not tainted 6.13.0-rc3-syzkaller-00174-ga024e377efed #0
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 09/13/2024
Call Trace:
__dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:94 [inline]
dump_stack_lvl+0x241/0x360 lib/dump_stack.c:120
__might_resched+0x5d4/0x780 kernel/sched/core.c:8758
__mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:562 [inline]
__mutex_lock+0x131/0xee0 kernel/locking/mutex.c:735
crypto_put_default_null_skcipher+0x18/0x70 crypto/crypto_null.c:179
aead_release+0x3d/0x50 crypto/algif_aead.c:489
alg_do_release crypto/af_alg.c:118 [inline]
alg_sock_destruct+0x86/0xc0 crypto/af_alg.c:502
__sk_destruct+0x58/0x5f0 net/core/sock.c:2260
rcu_do_batch kernel/rcu/tree.c:2567 [inline]
rcu_core+0xaaa/0x17a0 kernel/rcu/tree.c:2823
handle_softirqs+0x2d4/0x9b0 kernel/softirq.c:561
run_ksoftirqd+0xca/0x130 kernel/softirq.c:950
smpboot_thread_fn+0x544/0xa30 kernel/smpboot.c:164
kthread+0x2f0/0x390 kernel/kthread.c:389
ret_from_fork+0x4b/0x80 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:147
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:244
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