We use necessary cookies to keep DataHouse.pl working and optional cookies for analytics and marketing. You can accept all, reject optional cookies, or configure your choices.

OK, I AGREE I DISAGREE CHANGE THE CONSENTS

Thanks to cookies and similar technologies (hereinafter referred to as "cookies"), we can improve the functionality of our website and display content tailored to your needs and expectations.

For more information on the use of cookies, please see our [Cookie Policy].

I agree to:

Analytical use of cookies

Marketing use of cookies

Use of necessary cookies (always active)

Your preferences regarding cookies, expressed after logging in to the website, will be assigned to your Datahouse.pl account. This ensures that it is also saved if you sign in to your account from another device or browser.

CONFIRM SELECTION CANCEL

CVE-2022-48950: linux kernel vulnerability

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf: Fix perf_pending_task() UaF Per syzbot it is possible for perf_pending_task() to run after the event is free()'d. There are two related but distinct cases: - the task_work was already queued before destroying the event; - destroying the event itself queues the task_work. The first cannot be solved using task_work_cancel() since perf_release() itself might be called from a task_work (____fput), which means the current->task_works list is already empty and task_work_cancel() won't be able to find the perf_pending_task() entry. The simplest alternative is extending the perf_event lifetime to cover the task_work. The second is just silly, queueing a task_work while you know the event is going away makes no sense and is easily avoided by re-arranging how the event is marked STATE_DEAD and ensuring it goes through STATE_OFF on the way down.

CVE-2022-48950CVSS 7.8Linux

CVE-2022-48950: linux kernel vulnerability

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf: Fix perf_pending_task() UaF Per syzbot it is possible for perf_pending_task() to run after the event is free()'d. There are two related but distinct cases: - the task_work was already queued before destroying the event; - destroying the event itself queues the task_work. The first cannot be solved using task_work_cancel() since perf_release() itself might be called from a task_work (____fput), which means the current->task_works list is already empty and task_work_cancel() won't be able to find the perf_pending_task() entry. The simplest alternative is extending the perf_event lifetime to cover the task_work. The second is just silly, queueing a task_work while you know the event is going away makes no sense and is easily avoided by re-arranging how the event is marked STATE_DEAD and ensuring it goes through STATE_OFF on the way down.

CVSS: 7.8 HIGH
EPSS: 16.56%
Known exploited: not in KEV
Product: linux kernel

What is known

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf: Fix perf_pending_task() UaF Per syzbot it is possible for perf_pending_task() to run after the event is free()'d. There are two related but distinct cases: - the task_work was already queued before destroying the event; - destroying the event itself queues the task_work. The first cannot be solved using task_work_cancel() since perf_release() itself might be called from a task_work (____fput), which means the current->task_works list is already empty and task_work_cancel() won't be able to find the perf_pending_task() entry. The simplest alternative is extending the perf_event lifetime to cover the task_work. The second is just silly, queueing a task_work while you know the event is going away makes no sense and is easily avoided by re-arranging how the event is marked STATE_DEAD and ensuring it goes through STATE_OFF on the way down.

Sources

Back to security hub Contact DataHouse