CVE-2026-89974 : Detail

CVE-2026-89974

7.5
/
Tinggi
2026-09-16
11h17 +00:00
Adjacent
2026-10-19
09h18 +00:00
Notifikasi untuk CVE tertentu
Tetap terinformasi tentang perubahan untuk CVE tertentu.
Kelola notifikasi

Deskripsi CVE

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nvme-fc: fix double free of fabrics options when nvme_add_ctrl() fails nvmf_create_ctrl() owns the fabrics options and frees them whenever ->create_ctrl() returns an error, so a transport must not free them on its own error paths. nvme-fc tracks this by testing ctrl->ctrl.opts in nvme_fc_ctrl_free(), which requires nvme_fc_init_ctrl() to clear that pointer on every error exit. The coupling is implicit, and commit 1a9e218195a5 ("nvme: split device add from initialization") broke it by adding a second error exit. When nvme_add_ctrl() fails, nvme_fc_init_ctrl() jumps to out_put_ctrl:, past the "ctrl->ctrl.opts = NULL" that only sits on the fail_ctrl: path, so nvme_fc_ctrl_free() frees the options and nvmf_create_ctrl() frees them a second time: BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in nvmf_free_options+0x30/0x190 nvmf_free_options+0x30/0x190 drivers/nvme/host/fabrics.c:1284 nvmf_create_ctrl drivers/nvme/host/fabrics.c:1374 [inline] Freed by task 5534: nvme_fc_ctrl_free drivers/nvme/host/fc.c:2374 [inline] nvme_fc_init_ctrl+0xe17/0x1450 drivers/nvme/host/fc.c:3605 nvme_add_ctrl() fails when dev_set_name() cannot allocate, so this is reachable under memory pressure or fault injection. Without KASAN the options are freed twice. Rather than clear the pointer on the second exit as well, derive ownership the way nvme-tcp, nvme-rdma and nvme-loop do, from list membership: their free_ctrl leaves the options alone unless the controller made it onto the transport list. The list cannot simply be populated on the success path as it is there. nvme-fc runs the initial connect synchronously via flush_delayed_work(), and the controller has to be reachable on rport->ctrl_list for the whole of it: nvme_fc_unregister_remoteport() needs to find it to signal connectivity loss, nvme_fc_match_disconn_ls() matches an incoming Disconnect Association LS against ctrl->association_id, which is only assigned during that window, nvme_fc_resume_controller() needs it on remoteport re-registration, and nvme_fc_existing_controller() uses it to reject a duplicate connect racing the one in flight. Keep the insertion where it is and add a fail_unlist: label, falling into fail_ctrl:, for the error paths that run after it. The earlier error paths never reach the insertion and keep using fail_ctrl: directly, so the list is only touched where the controller is actually on it. nvme_fc_ctrl_free() cannot use the plain "goto free_ctrl" the other transports use, because it still has to put_device(), release the rport reference and free the ida entry for resources taken before the insertion. Sample list_empty() under rport->lock instead. ctrl->ctrl.opts also stays valid for the whole teardown now. That is not the bug being fixed, but it removes some fragility around the old idiom: nvme_free_ctrl() calls nvme_auth_free() before ->free_ctrl(), and ctrl_max_dhchaps() dereferences ctrl->opts without a NULL check when ctrl->dhchap_ctxs is set, which nvme-fc permits since NVMF_ALLOWED_OPTS allows the dhchap options. The nvme sysfs attributes that dereference ctrl->opts, such as hostnqn and address, evaluate their is_visible() test once at device_add() time and stay readable until cdev_device_del().

Informasi CVE

Metrik

Metrik Skor Tingkat keparahan CVSS Vektor Sumber
V3.1 7.5 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Adjacent

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

High

successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

High

There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

Referensi