From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.223.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52E0E84FB1; Fri, 24 May 2024 11:27:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.131 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716550048; cv=none; b=LP9IqH2w3L9kHPTtlryziRKw1fAfk9saDh/O5BgSQT9RiKb6nDNlGNak0xtMSLKi241wafFGOFAikQE/lLPNZF9fuROcoC3O/+KMggPCBPJP5nlW4XYwQrcgO+g/tQfghuukOEDKrheV5p1CaxtI8/AQ6K94c99m72Dn6DUClfU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716550048; c=relaxed/simple; bh=lWIcExuNIvSZE9aJBZpRjiblaXxJSviHY/f+mr0RxW8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=lp50eooHpYzWDjyESUX0x/oM8kEDrrcGom3QWeKRmHP7dIriujFTbi1pZ7y9g9SCmLOVpc2BDKCG0mo1h67wlMFE1gS6KiQui2Fj7LBzxz1isp0tEbmd1LgBqkqAxLH68v9xfkeTsgZxDFX94hbnafcIxDdGh8xQPC/amkXojOc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b=YierkngI; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b=YierkngI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.131 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="YierkngI"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="YierkngI" Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5ECB320982; Fri, 24 May 2024 11:27:24 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1716550044; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=4WLWgVOfLhXHFK0AX9hIsRSzqQqW6MtlpTAPDJhTPOU=; b=YierkngITLivRB8ICZHBOnZmEVE2CAdTqe0ax7WvpT4PYwIo624XgcYVWefW++2bvLkAJ5 nei5skVPwfU2I2gTpn2eW1Qa/04XsnHJzVhCb3FS9/Q5VNmPAGe3klzB1E4MOBE/kG1Akz SYzehHb3XE5RO9v8H5Q4MnU3R8x0cBY= Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=YierkngI DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1716550044; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=4WLWgVOfLhXHFK0AX9hIsRSzqQqW6MtlpTAPDJhTPOU=; b=YierkngITLivRB8ICZHBOnZmEVE2CAdTqe0ax7WvpT4PYwIo624XgcYVWefW++2bvLkAJ5 nei5skVPwfU2I2gTpn2eW1Qa/04XsnHJzVhCb3FS9/Q5VNmPAGe3klzB1E4MOBE/kG1Akz SYzehHb3XE5RO9v8H5Q4MnU3R8x0cBY= Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 449B613A3D; Fri, 24 May 2024 11:27:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id rqnADZx5UGbtCwAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Fri, 24 May 2024 11:27:24 +0000 Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 13:27:19 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Davide Benini Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , cve@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jason Xing , linux-cve-announce@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: CVE-2024-27429: netrom: Fix a data-race around sysctl_netrom_obsolescence_count_initialiser Message-ID: References: <2024051722-CVE-2024-27429-878c@gregkh> <2024052105-pulsate-reborn-119a@gregkh> <2024052219-storewide-arrogance-8d54@gregkh> <5f3cccea-eff5-40f7-a868-743ca837e84d@suse.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: <5f3cccea-eff5-40f7-a868-743ca837e84d@suse.com> X-Spam-Level: X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.01 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; DWL_DNSWL_LOW(-1.00)[suse.com:dkim]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[suse.com:s=susede1]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.com:s=susede1]; SPAMHAUS_XBL(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; RBL_SPAMHAUS_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[6]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167:received]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[suse.com:+]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[suse.com:dkim,imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo,imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:rdns] X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5ECB320982 X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd1.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.01 On Wed 22-05-24 12:21:54, Davide Benini wrote: > On 22/05/24 07:11, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 06:05:03PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Tue 21-05-24 16:40:24, Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 10:39:04AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > This and couple of others are all having the same pattern. Adding > > > > > READ_ONCE for an integer value with a claim that this might race with > > > > > sysctl updates. While the claim about the race is correct I fail to see > > > > > how this could have any security consequences. Even if a partial write > > > > > was observed which sounds _more_ than theoretical these all are merely > > > > > timeouts and delays. > > > > > > > > > > Is there anything I am missing? > > > > > > > > Nope, you are right, our fault, I'll go revoke this now. > > > > > > please also revoke all others touching the same function. > > > > I don't see any other CVEs that reference that function, but I do see > > some that reference the same type of issue in the same file: > > CVE-2024-27420 > > CVE-2024-27421 > > CVE-2024-27430 > > are those what you are referring to? If not, which ones do you think > > also should be revoked? > > It seems all the CVEs in the range [CVE-2024-27420, CVE-2024-27430] are of the same kind. > Shouldn't all be revoked? Yes all these bc76645ebdd0 ("netrom: Fix a data-race around sysctl_netrom_link_fails_count") b5dffcb8f71b ("netrom: Fix a data-race around sysctl_netrom_routing_control") f99b494b4043 ("netrom: Fix a data-race around sysctl_netrom_transport_no_activity_timeout") a2e706841488 ("netrom: Fix a data-race around sysctl_netrom_transport_requested_window_size") 43547d869943 ("netrom: Fix a data-race around sysctl_netrom_transport_busy_delay") 806f462ba902 ("netrom: Fix a data-race around sysctl_netrom_transport_acknowledge_delay") e799299aafed ("netrom: Fix a data-race around sysctl_netrom_transport_maximum_tries") 60a7a152abd4 ("netrom: Fix a data-race around sysctl_netrom_transport_timeout") 119cae5ea3f9 ("netrom: Fix data-races around sysctl_netrom_network_ttl_initialiser") cfd9f4a740f7 ("netrom: Fix a data-race around sysctl_netrom_obsolescence_count_initialiser") 958d6145a6d9 ("netrom: Fix a data-race around sysctl_netrom_default_path_quality") -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs