CVE-2026-98520 : 상세 정보

CVE-2026-98520

7.8
/
높음
2026-10-18
16h17 +00:00
Local
2026-10-24
14h16 +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: drm/amdkfd: fix use-after-free and multi-container gap in kfd_dev_mapping kfd_dev_mapping caches the address_space of the first /dev/kfd opener so that the GPU reset path can call unmap_mapping_range() to zap all userspace mappings of doorbell and MMIO ranges. This design has two bugs that both manifest under SRIOV with multiple containers: 1. Use-after-free / rwsem deadlock. The cached pointer refers to an inode owned by the first opener's container. When that container exits and its inode is released, kfd_dev_mapping becomes a dangling pointer. A subsequent GPU reset dereferences it inside unmap_mapping_range(), which takes i_mmap_rwsem on the freed inode, causing a hard hang observable as an uninterruptible rwsem wait. 2. Multi-container gap. Only the first opener's address_space is cached; VMAs created by later openers live in a different address_space and are never reached by unmap_mapping_range(). After a GPU reset those stale mappings keep doorbell and MMIO pages accessible to guest userspace with no GPU behind them, risking PCIe transaction timeouts and NMI panics. Fix both bugs with the same approach used by DRM core (drm_drv.c): create a private pseudo-filesystem at module init time and allocate one anonymous inode from it. In kfd_open() redirect every opener's file->f_mapping to that inode's address_space. The inode is module-owned, lives exactly as long as the amdgpu module, and collects VMAs from all openers in one address_space. A single unmap_mapping_range() call in the reset path then correctly reaches every container's mappings with no dangling pointer risk. The hang manifests as an NMI backtrace on the GPU reset workqueue stuck spinning in rwsem_down_read_slowpath() with a corrupted i_mmap_rwsem: Workqueue: amdgpu-reset-dev xgpu_ai_mailbox_flr_work [amdgpu] Call Trace: kvm_wait+0x1f/0x40 __pv_queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x31d/0x3a0 _raw_spin_lock_irq+0x51/0x80 rwsem_down_read_slowpath+0xb3/0x550 down_read+0x48/0xd0 unmap_mapping_range+0x71/0x140 kfd_dev_unmap_mapping_range+0x5b/0x140 [amdgpu] amdgpu_amdkfd_clear_kfd_mapping+0xd8/0x190 [amdgpu] amdgpu_device_gpu_recover+0x232/0x450 [amdgpu] xgpu_ai_mailbox_flr_work+0xb5/0xc0 [amdgpu] process_one_work+0x18e/0x3e0 worker_thread+0x2e3/0x420 kthread+0x10a/0x230 (cherry picked from commit 1128b4a52de1572e87431de837fd9850cb99542c)

CVE 정보

메트릭

메트릭 점수 심각도 CVSS 벡터 출처
V3.1 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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.

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.

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