From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6F21204C2F for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2025 09:28:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749029287; cv=none; b=jv5N9jN/sYP/hQhIZU7WpbmDCQq3hm3x3/V1XFtdycEkBD6ZeAyjcKVDJ4HSii8tqZaeIdwkH6p2GrbM60lQyzUeIPkW4YHYYTugKaJ3tGXzuj/8FCfslfkT2OeZMdARJDBW46xJluRJMqI5oPuy9az8k4Zyz1OlpxLdC3qH5T0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749029287; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xyBEour67kosDw6VnzqgDITeq5mziVJmhwKehj6NCsU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=lrODgRAZQf/Z2Qs3MRVcudZ1Svza0sEsJStbTYWam9Ad0D0SKsMiTWZYgM8WL+uwEjs6fxuYgxcCxpZX5MuEI+XK2xLugXhxriH+j2tv32sGHWRja0S8/RtHyLNF6KUdWSJzLPbqv5XFn+CoX9ll4nsVql244vqTs7lZ6gRqTsw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=bR7GGfyj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="bR7GGfyj" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E9461C4CEF0; Wed, 4 Jun 2025 09:28:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1749029286; bh=xyBEour67kosDw6VnzqgDITeq5mziVJmhwKehj6NCsU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=bR7GGfyjQ+prwXfXxqNxbfx/3yrfimoOKYMb9mjgXQLe0SCVv+S5TvcfxU9rnZLiX g9c0iFWYmFELlnB8lrS6x2ETzE2TNg/ubCLBqWKIX61BO6BGQwGqw/luATBSIbBX/7 f5dGNKN3B9AgUdPfknxoD36LxDRdj0us1TU8QjQ4= Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2025 11:28:03 +0200 From: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" To: Siddh Raman Pant Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: CVE-2025-21991: x86/microcode/AMD: Fix out-of-bounds on systems with CPU-less NUMA nodes Message-ID: <2025060430-rimless-splinter-4131@gregkh> References: <2025040257-CVE-2025-21991-6aae@gregkh> <793ae4a30ab15d0993ce9152ce91b6b98a05b1a5.camel@oracle.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <793ae4a30ab15d0993ce9152ce91b6b98a05b1a5.camel@oracle.com> On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 09:24:12AM +0000, Siddh Raman Pant wrote: > On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 13:51:58 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: > > > > x86/microcode/AMD: Fix out-of-bounds on systems with CPU-less NUMA nodes > > > > [...] > > > > This does not have any security implications since flashing microcode is > > a privileged operation but I believe this has reliability implications by > > potentially corrupting memory while flashing a microcode update. > > If it is explicitly specified that this does not have any security > implication, why is this a CVE? > > IMO this should be rejected. Doesn't "causing corrupted memory when flashing a microcode update" fit the cve.org definition of a "vulnerabilty"? thanks, greg k-h