CVE-2026-23159
16h01 +00:00
CVE 描述
perf: sched: Fix perf crash with new is_user_task() helper
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf: sched: Fix perf crash with new is_user_task() helper In order to do a user space stacktrace the current task needs to be a user task that has executed in user space. It use to be possible to test if a task is a user task or not by simply checking the task_struct mm field. If it was non NULL, it was a user task and if not it was a kernel task. But things have changed over time, and some kernel tasks now have their own mm field. An idea was made to instead test PF_KTHREAD and two functions were used to wrap this check in case it became more complex to test if a task was a user task or not[1]. But this was rejected and the C code simply checked the PF_KTHREAD directly. It was later found that not all kernel threads set PF_KTHREAD. The io-uring helpers instead set PF_USER_WORKER and this needed to be added as well. But checking the flags is still not enough. There's a very small window when a task exits that it frees its mm field and it is set back to NULL. If perf were to trigger at this moment, the flags test would say its a user space task but when perf would read the mm field it would crash with at NULL pointer dereference. Now there are flags that can be used to test if a task is exiting, but they are set in areas that perf may still want to profile the user space task (to see where it exited). The only real test is to check both the flags and the mm field. Instead of making this modification in every location, create a new is_user_task() helper function that does all the tests needed to know if it is safe to read the user space memory or not. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250425204120.639530125@goodmis.org/CVE 信息
相关弱点
| 弱点名称 | 来源 | |
|---|---|---|
| NULL Pointer Dereference The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL. |
指标
| 指标 | 评分 | 严重程度 | CVSS 向量 | 来源 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 5.5 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
更多信息
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 评分
EPSS 百分位
相关产品
配置 0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从（含） 6.6.116 至（不含） 6.6.123
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从（含） 6.12.57 至（不含） 6.12.69
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从（含） 6.17.7 至（不含） 6.18.9
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
