CVE-2026-45913:详情

CVE-2026-45913

5.5
/
中危
0.02%V4
2026-05-27
14h17 +00:00
Local
2026-11-06
16h18 +00:00
指定 CVE 通知
随时了解指定 CVE 的变更。
管理通知

CVE 描述

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: bridge: mcast: always update mdb_n_entries for vlan contexts syzbot triggered a warning[1] about the number of mdb entries in a context. It turned out that there are multiple ways to trigger that warning today (some got added during the years), the root cause of the problem is that the increase is done conditionally, and over the years these different conditions increased so there were new ways to trigger the warning, that is to do a decrease which wasn't paired with a previous increase. For example one way to trigger it is with flush: $ ip l add br0 up type bridge vlan_filtering 1 mcast_snooping 1 $ ip l add dumdum up master br0 type dummy $ bridge mdb add dev br0 port dumdum grp 239.0.0.1 permanent vid 1 $ ip link set dev br0 down $ ip link set dev br0 type bridge mcast_vlan_snooping 1 ^^^^ this will enable snooping, but will not update mdb_n_entries because in __br_multicast_enable_port_ctx() we check !netif_running $ bridge mdb flush dev br0 ^^^ this will trigger the warning because it will delete the pg which we added above, which will try to decrease mdb_n_entries Fix the problem by removing the conditional increase and always keep the count up-to-date while the vlan exists. In order to do that we have to first initialize it on port-vlan context creation, and then always increase or decrease the value regardless of mcast options. To keep the current behaviour we have to enforce the mdb limit only if the context is port's or if the port-vlan's mcast snooping is enabled. [1] ------------[ cut here ]------------ n == 0 WARNING: net/bridge/br_multicast.c:718 at br_multicast_port_ngroups_dec_one net/bridge/br_multicast.c:718 [inline], CPU#0: syz.4.4607/22043 WARNING: net/bridge/br_multicast.c:718 at br_multicast_port_ngroups_dec net/bridge/br_multicast.c:771 [inline], CPU#0: syz.4.4607/22043 WARNING: net/bridge/br_multicast.c:718 at br_multicast_del_pg+0x1bbe/0x1e20 net/bridge/br_multicast.c:825, CPU#0: syz.4.4607/22043 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 22043 Comm: syz.4.4607 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 01/24/2026 RIP: 0010:br_multicast_port_ngroups_dec_one net/bridge/br_multicast.c:718 [inline] RIP: 0010:br_multicast_port_ngroups_dec net/bridge/br_multicast.c:771 [inline] RIP: 0010:br_multicast_del_pg+0x1bbe/0x1e20 net/bridge/br_multicast.c:825 Code: 41 5f 5d e9 04 7a 48 f7 e8 3f 73 5c f7 90 0f 0b 90 e9 cf fd ff ff e8 31 73 5c f7 90 0f 0b 90 e9 16 fd ff ff e8 23 73 5c f7 90 <0f> 0b 90 e9 60 fd ff ff e8 15 73 5c f7 eb 05 e8 0e 73 5c f7 48 8b RSP: 0018:ffffc9000c207220 EFLAGS: 00010293 RAX: ffffffff8a68042d RBX: ffff88807c6f1800 RCX: ffff888066e90000 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: ffff888066e90000 R09: 000000000000000c R10: 000000000000000c R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffff8880303ef800 R13: dffffc0000000000 R14: ffff888050eb11c4 R15: 1ffff1100a1d6238 FS: 00007fa45921b6c0(0000) GS:ffff8881256f5000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007fa4591f9ff8 CR3: 0000000081df2000 CR4: 00000000003526f0 Call Trace: br_mdb_flush_pgs net/bridge/br_mdb.c:1525 [inline] br_mdb_flush net/bridge/br_mdb.c:1544 [inline] br_mdb_del_bulk+0x5e2/0xb20 net/bridge/br_mdb.c:1561 rtnl_mdb_del+0x48a/0x640 net/core/rtnetlink.c:-1 rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x77e/0xbe0 net/core/rtnetlink.c:6967 netlink_rcv_skb+0x232/0x4b0 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2550 netlink_unicast_kernel net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1318 [inline] netlink_unicast+0x80f/0x9b0 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1344 netlink_sendmsg+0x813/0xb40 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1894 sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:727 [inline] __sock_sendmsg net/socket.c:742 [inline] ____sys_sendmsg+0xa68/0xad0 net/socket.c:2592 ___sys_sendmsg+0x2a5/0x360 net/socke ---truncated---

CVE 信息

相关弱点

CWE-ID 弱点名称 来源
CWE Other 暂无信息。

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

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.

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 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.

nvd@nist.gov

EPSS

EPSS 是一种预测漏洞被利用可能性的评分模型。

EPSS 评分

EPSS 模型生成一个介于 0 到 1(即 0% 到 100%)之间的概率评分。评分越高,漏洞被利用的可能性越大。

EPSS 百分位

百分位用于根据 EPSS 评分对 CVE 进行排名。例如,EPSS 百分位为第 95 的 CVE,其被利用的可能性高于 95% 的其他 CVE。因此,百分位可用于比较不同 CVE 的 EPSS 评分。

相关产品

配置 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 6.3 至(不含) 6.6.128

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 6.7 至(不含) 6.12.75

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 6.13 至(不含) 6.18.14

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 6.19 至(不含) 6.19.4

参考资料