In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ceph: fix race condition validating r_parent before applying state
Add validation to ensure the cached parent directory inode matches the
directory info in MDS replies. This prevents client-side race conditions
where concurrent operations (e.g. rename) cause r_parent to become stale
between request initiation and reply processing, which could lead to
applying state changes to incorrect directory inodes.
[ idryomov: folded a kerneldoc fixup and a follow-up fix from Alex to
move CEPH_CAP_PIN reference when r_parent is updated:
When the parent directory lock is not held, req->r_parent can become
stale and is updated to point to the correct inode. However, the
associated CEPH_CAP_PIN reference was not being adjusted. The
CEPH_CAP_PIN is a reference on an inode that is tracked for
accounting purposes. Moving this pin is important to keep the
accounting balanced. When the pin was not moved from the old parent
to the new one, it created two problems: The reference on the old,
stale parent was never released, causing a reference leak.
A reference for the new parent was never acquired, creating the risk
of a reference underflow later in ceph_mdsc_release_request(). This
patch corrects the logic by releasing the pin from the old parent and
acquiring it for the new parent when r_parent is switched. This
ensures reference accounting stays balanced. ]
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