DEBIAN-CVE-2024-27005

Advisory lineage Upstream: 1 Downstream: 0
Upstream
CVE-2024-27005
Published: 01 May 2024, 06:15
Last modified:28 Apr 2026, 20:27

Vulnerability Summary

Overall Risk (default)
medium
25/100
CVSS Score
6.3 MEDIUM
3.1 (osv_debian)
EPSS Score
No data
KEV
Not listed
Ransomware
No reports
Public exploits
None found
Dark Web
Not detected

Timeline

01 May 2024, 06:15
Published
Vulnerability first disclosed
28 Apr 2026, 20:27
Last Modified
Vulnerability information updated

Description

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")

CVSS Metrics

  • v3.1•MEDIUM•Score: 6.3CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H

Affected Systems

  • debian•linux

    < 6.8.9-1 | < 6.8.9-1

References (1)