CVE-2022-50652 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2022-50652
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-2022-50652 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Published on: 09 Dec 2025, 01:16 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2022-50652 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2022-50652: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: uio: uio_dmem_genirq: Fix missing unlock in irq configuration Commit b74351287d4b ("uio: fix a sleep-in-atomic-context bug in uio_dmem_genirq_irqcontrol()") started calling disable_irq() without holding the spinlock because it can sleep. However, that fix introduced another bug: if interrupt is already disabled and a new disable request comes in, then the spinlock is not unlocked: root@localhost:~# printf '\x00\x00\x00\x00' > /dev/uio0 root@localhost:~# printf '\x00\x00\x00\x00' > /dev/uio0 root@localhost:~# [ 14.851538] BUG: scheduling while atomic: bash/223/0x00000002 [ 14.851991] Modules linked in: uio_dmem_genirq uio myfpga(OE) bochs drm_vram_helper drm_ttm_helper ttm drm_kms_helper drm snd_pcm ppdev joydev psmouse snd_timer snd e1000fb_sys_fops syscopyarea parport sysfillrect soundcore sysimgblt input_leds pcspkr i2c_piix4 serio_raw floppy evbug qemu_fw_cfg mac_hid pata_acpi ip_tables x_tables autofs4 [last unloaded: parport_pc] [ 14.854206] CPU: 0 PID: 223 Comm: bash Tainted: G OE 6.0.0-rc7 #21 [ 14.854786] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.16.0-0-gd239552ce722-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 [ 14.855664] Call Trace: [ 14.855861] <TASK> [ 14.856025] dump_stack_lvl+0x4d/0x67 [ 14.856325] dump_stack+0x14/0x1a [ 14.856583] __schedule_bug.cold+0x4b/0x5c [ 14.856915] __schedule+0xe81/0x13d0 [ 14.857199] ? idr_find+0x13/0x20 [ 14.857456] ? get_work_pool+0x2d/0x50 [ 14.857756] ? __flush_work+0x233/0x280 [ 14.858068] ? __schedule+0xa95/0x13d0 [ 14.858307] ? idr_find+0x13/0x20 [ 14.858519] ? get_work_pool+0x2d/0x50 [ 14.858798] schedule+0x6c/0x100 [ 14.859009] schedule_hrtimeout_range_clock+0xff/0x110 [ 14.859335] ? tty_write_room+0x1f/0x30 [ 14.859598] ? n_tty_poll+0x1ec/0x220 [ 14.859830] ? tty_ldisc_deref+0x1a/0x20 [ 14.860090] schedule_hrtimeout_range+0x17/0x20 [ 14.860373] do_select+0x596/0x840 [ 14.860627] ? __kernel_text_address+0x16/0x50 [ 14.860954] ? poll_freewait+0xb0/0xb0 [ 14.861235] ? poll_freewait+0xb0/0xb0 [ 14.861517] ? rpm_resume+0x49d/0x780 [ 14.861798] ? common_interrupt+0x59/0xa0 [ 14.862127] ? asm_common_interrupt+0x2b/0x40 [ 14.862511] ? __uart_start.isra.0+0x61/0x70 [ 14.862902] ? __check_object_size+0x61/0x280 [ 14.863255] core_sys_select+0x1c6/0x400 [ 14.863575] ? vfs_write+0x1c9/0x3d0 [ 14.863853] ? vfs_write+0x1c9/0x3d0 [ 14.864121] ? _copy_from_user+0x45/0x70 [ 14.864526] do_pselect.constprop.0+0xb3/0xf0 [ 14.864893] ? do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x90 [ 14.865228] ? do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x90 [ 14.865556] __x64_sys_pselect6+0x76/0xa0 [ 14.865906] do_syscall_64+0x60/0x90 [ 14.866214] ? syscall_exit_to_user_mode+0x2a/0x50 [ 14.866640] ? do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x90 [ 14.866972] ? do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x90 [ 14.867286] ? do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x90 [ 14.867626] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd [...] stripped [ 14.872959] </TASK> ('myfpga' is a simple 'uio_dmem_genirq' driver I wrote to test this) The implementation of "uio_dmem_genirq" was based on "uio_pdrv_genirq" and it is used in a similar manner to the "uio_pdrv_genirq" driver with respect to interrupt configuration and handling. At the time "uio_dmem_genirq" was introduced, both had the same implementation of the 'uio_info' handlers irqcontrol() and handler(). Then commit 34cb27528398 ("UIO: Fix concurrency issue"), which was only applied to "uio_pdrv_genirq", ended up making them a little different. That commit, among other things, changed disable_irq() to disable_irq_nosync() in the implementation of irqcontrol(). The motivation there was to avoid a deadlock between irqcontrol() and handler(), since it added a spinlock in the irq handler, and disable_irq() waits for the completion of the irq handler. By changing disable_irq() to disable_irq_nosync() in irqcontrol(), we also avoid the sleeping-whil ---truncated---

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2022-50652

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2022-50652 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-2022-50652

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2022-50652.

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-2022-50652, 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-2022-50652, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2022-50652 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2022-50652 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2022-50652 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2022-50652 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2022-50652: 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-2025-15166 – A vulnerability was found in itsourcecode Online Cake Ordering System 1.0. This affects an unknown function of the file /updatesupplier.php?action=...
  • CVE-2025-15165 – A vulnerability has been found in itsourcecode Online Cake Ordering System 1.0. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /updatecust...
  • CVE-2025-15164 – A security flaw has been discovered in Tenda WH450 1.0.0.18. This affects an unknown part of the file /goform/SafeMacFilter. The manipulation of th...
  • CVE-2025-15163 – A vulnerability was identified in Tenda WH450 1.0.0.18. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /goform/SafeEmailFilter. T...
  • CVE-2025-15067 – Unrestricted Upload of File with Dangerous Type vulnerability in Innorix Innorix WP allows Upload a Web Shell to a Web Server.This issue affects In...