CVE-2022-50280 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2022-50280
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress
Analysis In Progress

Attack Complexity Details

  • Attack Complexity:
    Attack Complexity Analysis In Progress
  • Attack Vector:
    Attack Vector Under Analysis
  • Privileges Required: None
    No authentication is required for exploitation.
  • Scope:
    Impact is confined to the initially vulnerable component.
  • User Interaction: None
    No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2022-50280 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Published on: 15 Sep 2025, 15:15 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2022-50280 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2022-50280: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: pnode: terminate at peers of source The propagate_mnt() function handles mount propagation when creating mounts and propagates the source mount tree @source_mnt to all applicable nodes of the destination propagation mount tree headed by @dest_mnt. Unfortunately it contains a bug where it fails to terminate at peers of @source_mnt when looking up copies of the source mount that become masters for copies of the source mount tree mounted on top of slaves in the destination propagation tree causing a NULL dereference. Once the mechanics of the bug are understood it's easy to trigger. Because of unprivileged user namespaces it is available to unprivileged users. While fixing this bug we've gotten confused multiple times due to unclear terminology or missing concepts. So let's start this with some clarifications: * The terms "master" or "peer" denote a shared mount. A shared mount belongs to a peer group. * A peer group is a set of shared mounts that propagate to each other. They are identified by a peer group id. The peer group id is available in @shared_mnt->mnt_group_id. Shared mounts within the same peer group have the same peer group id. The peers in a peer group can be reached via @shared_mnt->mnt_share. * The terms "slave mount" or "dependent mount" denote a mount that receives propagation from a peer in a peer group. IOW, shared mounts may have slave mounts and slave mounts have shared mounts as their master. Slave mounts of a given peer in a peer group are listed on that peers slave list available at @shared_mnt->mnt_slave_list. * The term "master mount" denotes a mount in a peer group. IOW, it denotes a shared mount or a peer mount in a peer group. The term "master mount" - or "master" for short - is mostly used when talking in the context of slave mounts that receive propagation from a master mount. A master mount of a slave identifies the closest peer group a slave mount receives propagation from. The master mount of a slave can be identified via @slave_mount->mnt_master. Different slaves may point to different masters in the same peer group. * Multiple peers in a peer group can have non-empty ->mnt_slave_lists. Non-empty ->mnt_slave_lists of peers don't intersect. Consequently, to ensure all slave mounts of a peer group are visited the ->mnt_slave_lists of all peers in a peer group have to be walked. * Slave mounts point to a peer in the closest peer group they receive propagation from via @slave_mnt->mnt_master (see above). Together with these peers they form a propagation group (see below). The closest peer group can thus be identified through the peer group id @slave_mnt->mnt_master->mnt_group_id of the peer/master that a slave mount receives propagation from. * A shared-slave mount is a slave mount to a peer group pg1 while also a peer in another peer group pg2. IOW, a peer group may receive propagation from another peer group. If a peer group pg1 is a slave to another peer group pg2 then all peers in peer group pg1 point to the same peer in peer group pg2 via ->mnt_master. IOW, all peers in peer group pg1 appear on the same ->mnt_slave_list. IOW, they cannot be slaves to different peer groups. * A pure slave mount is a slave mount that is a slave to a peer group but is not a peer in another peer group. * A propagation group denotes the set of mounts consisting of a single peer group pg1 and all slave mounts and shared-slave mounts that point to a peer in that peer group via ->mnt_master. IOW, all slave mounts such that @slave_mnt->mnt_master->mnt_group_id is equal to @shared_mnt->mnt_group_id. The concept of a propagation group makes it easier to talk about a single propagation level in a propagation tree. For example, in propagate_mnt() the immediate peers of @dest_mnt and all slaves of @dest_mnt's peer group form a propagation group pr ---truncated---

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2022-50280

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2022-50280 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2022-50280

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2022-50280.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2022-50280, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2022-50280, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2022-50280 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2022-50280 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2022-50280 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2022-50280 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2022-50280: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

  • CVE-2025-62672 – rplay through 3.3.2 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (SIGSEGV and daemon crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact. This occurs...
  • CVE-2025-47410 – Apache Geode is vulnerable to CSRF attacks through GET requests to the Management and Monitoring REST API that could allow an attacker who has tric...
  • CVE-2025-11926 – The Related Posts Lite plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via admin settings in all versions up to, and including, 1...
  • CVE-2025-9890 – The Theme Editor plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Cross-Site Request Forgery in all versions up to, and including, 3.0. This is due to missing...
  • CVE-2025-5555 – A vulnerability has been found in Nixdorf Wincor PORT IO Driver up to 1.0.0.1. This affects the function sub_11100 in the library wnport.sys of the...