In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: tls: explicitly disallow disconnect
syzbot discovered that it can disconnect a TLS socket and then
run into all sort of unexpected corner cases. I have a vague
recollection of Eric pointing this out to us a long time ago.
Supporting disconnect is really hard, for one thing if offload
is enabled we'd need to wait for all packets to be _acked_.
Disconnect is not commonly used, disallow it.
The immediate problem syzbot run into is the warning in the strp,
but that's just the easiest bug to trigger:
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 5834 at net/tls/tls_strp.c:486 tls_strp_msg_load+0x72e/0xa80 net/tls/tls_strp.c:486
RIP: 0010:tls_strp_msg_load+0x72e/0xa80 net/tls/tls_strp.c:486
Call Trace:
tls_rx_rec_wait+0x280/0xa60 net/tls/tls_sw.c:1363
tls_sw_recvmsg+0x85c/0x1c30 net/tls/tls_sw.c:2043
inet6_recvmsg+0x2c9/0x730 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:678
sock_recvmsg_nosec net/socket.c:1023 [inline]
sock_recvmsg+0x109/0x280 net/socket.c:1045
__sys_recvfrom+0x202/0x380 net/socket.c:2237
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
- 0.3% 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