In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
scsi: target: Fix recursive locking in __configfs_open_file()
In flush_write_buffer, &p->frag_sem is acquired and then the loaded store
function is called, which, here, is target_core_item_dbroot_store(). This
function called filp_open(), following which these functions were called
(in reverse order), according to the call trace:
down_read
__configfs_open_file
do_dentry_open
vfs_open
do_open
path_openat
do_filp_open
file_open_name
filp_open
target_core_item_dbroot_store
flush_write_buffer
configfs_write_iter
target_core_item_dbroot_store() tries to validate the new file path by
trying to open the file path provided to it; however, in this case, the bug
report shows:
db_root: not a directory: /sys/kernel/config/target/dbroot
indicating that the same configfs file was tried to be opened, on which it
is currently working on. Thus, it is trying to acquire frag_sem semaphore
of the same file of which it already holds the semaphore obtained in
flush_write_buffer(), leading to acquiring the semaphore in a nested manner
and a possibility of recursive locking.
Fix this by modifying target_core_item_dbroot_store() to use kern_path()
instead of filp_open() to avoid opening the file using filesystem-specific
function __configfs_open_file(), and further modifying it to make this fix
compatible.
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
- 0.1% 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 every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 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 every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (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)60 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 Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). 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