CVE-2026-68173 : 詳細

CVE-2026-68173

7.1
/
高
2026-08-10
13h20 +00:00
Local
2026-08-17
05h18 +00:00
特定のCVEの通知
特定のCVEの変更情報をいち早くお届けします。
通知を管理する

CVE の説明

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ublk: wait on ublk_dev_ready() instead of ub->completion ub->completion is only re-armed by a successful START_USER_RECOVERY. If the ublk server sends END_USER_RECOVERY without one - e.g. its START failed with -EBUSY and the error was ignored - the wait is satisfied by the stale completion of the previous recovery cycle, and the device is marked LIVE and the requeue list kicked while the FETCH stream is still running and ubq->canceling is still set. The kick redispatches a previously requeued request, __ublk_queue_rq_common() sees ->canceling and parks it again via __ublk_abort_rq(), and after the last FETCH clears ->canceling nothing ever kicks the requeue list again: the request is stranded there while holding its tag. If it is the flush machinery's flush_rq, every subsequent fsync piles up in uninterruptible sleep and teardown hangs on tag draining. This matches a report of a lost PREFLUSH with ext4 on top of ublk after daemon crash recovery. ub->completion is an edge-triggered latch used as a proxy for the level condition "every queue has fetched all I/O commands", which can regress (F_BATCH's UNPREP, daemon death) and whose re-arm can be skipped. Drop it and wait on the real condition instead: the new helper ublk_wait_dev_ready_and_lock() waits on ublk_dev_ready() via wait_var_event_interruptible(), woken from ublk_mark_io_ready(), then re-checks it under ub->mutex, waiting again on regression, and returns with the mutex held and readiness guaranteed. Readiness becomes true in the same ub->mutex critical section that clears the last queue's ->canceling, so END_USER_RECOVERY marks the device LIVE and kicks the requeue list strictly after ->canceling clears. The wait stays interruptible, so a server whose daemon died can still be signalled out. For ublk_ctrl_start_dev() this replaces the fail-fast -EINVAL on an F_BATCH ready->UNPREP regression with waiting until the device is ready again.

CVE の情報

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 7.1 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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.

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 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.

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.

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

参考資料