CVE-2026-74568 : 상세 정보

CVE-2026-74568

9.3
/
긴급
2026-08-15
13h18 +00:00
Local
2026-10-16
20h17 +00:00
특정 CVE 알림
특정 CVE의 변경 사항에 대한 정보를 받아보세요.
알림 관리

CVE 설명

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: KVM: arm64: vgic: Fix race between LPI release and re-registration Fix a potential race between decrementing an LPI's reference count and evicting that structure from the LPI xarray. LPI structures are maintained in the VGIC LPI xarray (dist->lpi_xa). When the reference count of an LPI structure drops to zero, vgic_release_lpi_locked() removes the structure from the xarray and frees it under the xarray lock. However, the release of an LPI can race with a concurrent LPI re-registration with the same INTID via vgic_add_lpi() on another CPU, since the reference count drop and the xarray eviction are not performed in a single atomic step. This can happen e.g. if the guest issues a DISCARD while the LPI is still referenced from a vCPU's active-pending list (ap_list), and the same INTID is re-mapped via MAPTI. Particularly, vgic_release_lpi_locked() is called from two distinct paths: direct release via vgic_put_irq(), and deferred release via vgic_release_deleted_lpis(). During direct release, the issue can result in deleting a newly registered LPI from the xarray: CPU0 (Releasing LPI) CPU1 (Adding new LPI) ==================== ===================== vgic_put_irq() __vgic_put_irq() refcount_dec_and_test() vgic_add_lpi() xa_lock_irqsave() old_irq = xa_load(.., intid) vgic_try_get_irq_ref(old_irq) == false new IRQ inserted --> __xa_store(.., intid, ..) xa_unlock_irqrestore() xa_lock_irqsave(); vgic_release_lpi_locked() __xa_erase(.., irq->intid) <-- BUG: new IRQ is erased kfree_rcu(old_irq) During the deferred release path, the old IRQ can be leaked: CPU0 (Releasing LPI) CPU1 (Adding new LPI) ==================== ===================== vgic_put_irq_norelease() __vgic_put_irq() refcount_dec_and_test() irq->pending_release = true vgic_add_lpi() xa_lock_irqsave() old_irq = xa_load(.., intid) vgic_try_get_irq_ref(oldirq) == false BUG: old IRQ overwritten --> __xa_store(.., intid, ..) xa_unlock_irqrestore() vgic_release_deleted_lpis() xa_lock_irqsave() xa_for_each() { .. } <-- old IRQ with pending_release = true is gone, so it cannot be released To fix the direct release path, move the reference count drop inside the xarray lock, making sure that vgic_add_lpi() never encounters the to-be-released LPI. In the deferred release path, the refcount drop must happen under a raw spinlock, so the xarray lock cannot be grabbed, and the same solution does not work. Instead, update vgic_add_lpi(), so that if it evicts an LPI from the xarray, it takes on the responsibility of freeing it. Consequently, an LPI may now be freed concurrently after a deferred release drops the refcount, so accessing the pending_release field is no longer safe from use-after-free. Delete all uses of the flag, and update vgic_release_deleted_lpis() to identify orphaned LPIs purely based on their refcount.

CVE 정보

메트릭

메트릭 점수 심각도 CVSS 벡터 출처
V3.1 9.3 CRITICAL CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/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.

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.

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.

Changed

An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.

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

참고 자료