In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
scsi: ufs: core: Fix SError in ufshcd_rtc_work() during UFS suspend
In __ufshcd_wl_suspend(), cancel_delayed_work_sync() is called to cancel
the UFS RTC work, but it is placed after ufshcd_vops_suspend(hba, pm_op,
POST_CHANGE). This creates a race condition where ufshcd_rtc_work() can
still be running while ufshcd_vops_suspend() is executing. When
UFSHCD_CAP_CLK_GATING is not supported, the condition
!hba->clk_gating.active_reqs is always true, causing ufshcd_update_rtc()
to be executed. Since ufshcd_vops_suspend() typically performs clock
gating operations, executing ufshcd_update_rtc() at that moment triggers
an SError. The kernel panic trace is as follows:
Kernel panic - not syncing: Asynchronous SError Interrupt
Call trace:
dump_backtrace+0xec/0x128
show_stack+0x18/0x28
dump_stack_lvl+0x40/0xa0
dump_stack+0x18/0x24
panic+0x148/0x374
nmi_panic+0x3c/0x8c
arm64_serror_panic+0x64/0x8c
do_serror+0xc4/0xc8
el1h_64_error_handler+0x34/0x4c
el1h_64_error+0x68/0x6c
el1_interrupt+0x20/0x58
el1h_64_irq_handler+0x18/0x24
el1h_64_irq+0x68/0x6c
ktime_get+0xc4/0x12c
ufshcd_mcq_sq_stop+0x4c/0xec
ufshcd_mcq_sq_cleanup+0x64/0x1dc
ufshcd_clear_cmd+0x38/0x134
ufshcd_issue_dev_cmd+0x298/0x4d0
ufshcd_exec_dev_cmd+0x1a4/0x1c4
ufshcd_query_attr+0xbc/0x19c
ufshcd_rtc_work+0x10c/0x1c8
process_scheduled_works+0x1c4/0x45c
worker_thread+0x32c/0x3e8
kthread+0x120/0x1d8
ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
Fix this by moving cancel_delayed_work_sync() before the call to
ufshcd_vops_suspend(hba, pm_op, PRE_CHANGE), ensuring the UFS RTC work is
fully completed or cancelled at that point.
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
- <0.1% 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