In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
f2fs: fix potential deadloop in prepare_compress_overwrite()
Jan Prusakowski reported a kernel hang issue as below:
When running xfstests on linux-next kernel (6.14.0-rc3, 6.12) I
encountered a problem in generic/475 test where fsstress process
gets blocked in __f2fs_write_data_pages() and the test hangs.
The options I used are:
MKFS_OPTIONS -- -O compression -O extra_attr -O project_quota -O quota /dev/vdc
MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o acl,user_xattr -o discard,compress_extension=* /dev/vdc /vdc
INFO: task kworker/u8:0:11 blocked for more than 122 seconds.
Not tainted 6.14.0-rc3-xfstests-lockdep #1
"echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message.
task:kworker/u8:0 state:D stack:0 pid:11 tgid:11 ppid:2 task_flags:0x4208160 flags:0x00004000
Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn (flush-253:0)
Call Trace:
__schedule+0x309/0x8e0
schedule+0x3a/0x100
schedule_preempt_disabled+0x15/0x30
__mutex_lock+0x59a/0xdb0
__f2fs_write_data_pages+0x3ac/0x400
do_writepages+0xe8/0x290
__writeback_single_inode+0x5c/0x360
writeback_sb_inodes+0x22f/0x570
wb_writeback+0xb0/0x410
wb_do_writeback+0x47/0x2f0
wb_workfn+0x5a/0x1c0
process_one_work+0x223/0x5b0
worker_thread+0x1d5/0x3c0
kthread+0xfd/0x230
ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
The root cause is: once generic/475 starts toload error table to dm
device, f2fs_prepare_compress_overwrite() will loop reading compressed
cluster pages due to IO error, meanwhile it has held .writepages lock,
it can block all other writeback tasks.
Let's fix this issue w/ below changes:
- add f2fs_handle_page_eio() in prepare_compress_overwrite() to
detect IO error.
- detect cp_error earler in f2fs_read_multi_pages().
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it