CVE-2026-23186
16h27 +00:00
CVE の説明
hwmon: (acpi_power_meter) Fix deadlocks related to acpi_power_meter_notify()
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: hwmon: (acpi_power_meter) Fix deadlocks related to acpi_power_meter_notify() The acpi_power_meter driver's .notify() callback function, acpi_power_meter_notify(), calls hwmon_device_unregister() under a lock that is also acquired by callbacks in sysfs attributes of the device being unregistered which is prone to deadlocks between sysfs access and device removal. Address this by moving the hwmon device removal in acpi_power_meter_notify() outside the lock in question, but notice that doing it alone is not sufficient because two concurrent METER_NOTIFY_CONFIG notifications may be attempting to remove the same device at the same time. To prevent that from happening, add a new lock serializing the execution of the switch () statement in acpi_power_meter_notify(). For simplicity, it is a static mutex which should not be a problem from the performance perspective. The new lock also allows the hwmon_device_register_with_info() in acpi_power_meter_notify() to be called outside the inner lock because it prevents the other notifications handled by that function from manipulating the "resource" object while the hwmon device based on it is being registered. The sending of ACPI netlink messages from acpi_power_meter_notify() is serialized by the new lock too which generally helps to ensure that the order of handling firmware notifications is the same as the order of sending netlink messages related to them. In addition, notice that hwmon_device_register_with_info() may fail in which case resource->hwmon_dev will become an error pointer, so add checks to avoid attempting to unregister the hwmon device pointer to by it in that case to acpi_power_meter_notify() and acpi_power_meter_remove().CVE の情報
関連する弱点
| 弱点名 | 出典 | |
|---|---|---|
| Improper Locking The product does not properly acquire or release a lock on a resource, leading to unexpected resource state changes and behaviors. |
メトリクス
| メトリクス | スコア | 深刻度 | CVSS ベクター | 出典 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 5.5 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
詳細情報
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe 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. Local The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Attack Complexity This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. Low Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. Low The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources. 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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. None There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. None There is no loss of integrity within 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThese 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. |
nvd@nist.gov |
EPSS
EPSSスコア
EPSSパーセンタイル
関連製品
構成 0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ～から（含む） 6.15 ～まで（含まない） 6.18.10
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19
