If left unpatched, CVE-2024-27005 could lead to major system disruptions or data loss.
Status: Awaiting Analysis
Last updated: 🕘 21 Nov 2024, 09:03 UTC
Originally published on: 🕕 01 May 2024, 06:15 UTC
Time between publication and last update: 204 days
CVSS Release: version 3
134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0
Secondary
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H
CVE-2024-27005: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: interconnect: Don't access req_list while it's being manipulated The icc_lock mutex was split into separate icc_lock and icc_bw_lock mutexes in [1] to avoid lockdep splats. However, this didn't adequately protect access to icc_node::req_list. The icc_set_bw() function will eventually iterate over req_list while only holding icc_bw_lock, but req_list can be modified while only holding icc_lock. This causes races between icc_set_bw(), of_icc_get(), and icc_put(). Example A: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- icc_set_bw(path_a) mutex_lock(&icc_bw_lock); icc_put(path_b) mutex_lock(&icc_lock); aggregate_requests() hlist_for_each_entry(r, ... hlist_del(... <r = invalid pointer> Example B: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- icc_set_bw(path_a) mutex_lock(&icc_bw_lock); path_b = of_icc_get() of_icc_get_by_index() mutex_lock(&icc_lock); path_find() path_init() aggregate_requests() hlist_for_each_entry(r, ... hlist_add_head(... <r = invalid pointer> Fix this by ensuring icc_bw_lock is always held before manipulating icc_node::req_list. The additional places icc_bw_lock is held don't perform any memory allocations, so we should still be safe from the original lockdep splats that motivated the separate locks. [1] commit af42269c3523 ("interconnect: Fix locking for runpm vs reclaim")
The exploitability of CVE-2024-27005 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).
This vulnerability, CVE-2024-27005, requires a high level of attack complexity and low privileges, making it difficult but not impossible to exploit. Organizations should ensure robust security configurations to mitigate risks.
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.
Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2024-27005, 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.
Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2024-27005, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.
The EPSS score estimates the probability that this vulnerability will be exploited in the near future.
EPSS Score: 0.045% (probability of exploit)
EPSS Percentile: 18.35%
(lower percentile = lower relative risk)
This vulnerability is less risky than approximately 81.65% of others.
Unknown
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.