The probability is the direct output of the EPSS model, and conveys an overall sense of the threat of exploitation in the wild. The percentile measures the EPSS probability relative to all known EPSS scores. Note: This data is updated daily, relying on the latest available EPSS model version. Check out the EPSS documentation for more details.
In a few clicks we can analyze your entire application and see what components are vulnerable in your application, and suggest you quick fixes.
Test your applicationsUpgrade RHEL:9
kernel-64k-debug-modules
to version 0:5.14.0-427.33.1.el9_4 or higher.
This issue was patched in RHSA-2024:5928
.
Note: Versions mentioned in the description apply only to the upstream kernel-64k-debug-modules
package and not the kernel-64k-debug-modules
package as distributed by RHEL
.
See How to fix?
for RHEL:9
relevant fixed versions and status.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ice: fix LAG and VF lock dependency in ice_reset_vf()
9f74a3dfcf83 ("ice: Fix VF Reset paths when interface in a failed over aggregate"), the ice driver has acquired the LAG mutex in ice_reset_vf(). The commit placed this lock acquisition just prior to the acquisition of the VF configuration lock.
If ice_reset_vf() acquires the configuration lock via the ICE_VF_RESET_LOCK flag, this could deadlock with ice_vc_cfg_qs_msg() because it always acquires the locks in the order of the VF configuration lock and then the LAG mutex.
Lockdep reports this violation almost immediately on creating and then removing 2 VF:
kworker/60:3/6771 is trying to acquire lock: ff40d43e099380a0 (&vf->cfg_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice]
but task is already holding lock: ff40d43ea1961210 (&pf->lag_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: ice_reset_vf+0xb7/0x4d0 [ice]
which lock already depends on the new lock.
the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
-> #1 (&pf->lag_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0x4f8/0xb40 lock_acquire+0xd4/0x2d0 __mutex_lock+0x9b/0xbf0 ice_vc_cfg_qs_msg+0x45/0x690 [ice] ice_vc_process_vf_msg+0x4f5/0x870 [ice] __ice_clean_ctrlq+0x2b5/0x600 [ice] ice_service_task+0x2c9/0x480 [ice] process_one_work+0x1e9/0x4d0 worker_thread+0x1e1/0x3d0 kthread+0x104/0x140 ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1b/0x30
-> #0 (&vf->cfg_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}: check_prev_add+0xe2/0xc50 validate_chain+0x558/0x800 __lock_acquire+0x4f8/0xb40 lock_acquire+0xd4/0x2d0 __mutex_lock+0x9b/0xbf0 ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] ice_process_vflr_event+0x98/0xd0 [ice] ice_service_task+0x1cc/0x480 [ice] process_one_work+0x1e9/0x4d0 worker_thread+0x1e1/0x3d0 kthread+0x104/0x140 ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1b/0x30
other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(&pf->lag_mutex); lock(&vf->cfg_lock); lock(&pf->lag_mutex); lock(&vf->cfg_lock);
*** DEADLOCK *** 4 locks held by kworker/60:3/6771: #0: ff40d43e05428b38 ((wq_completion)ice){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x176/0x4d0 #1: ff50d06e05197e58 ((work_completion)(&pf->serv_task)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x176/0x4d0 #2: ff40d43ea1960e50 (&pf->vfs.table_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: ice_process_vflr_event+0x48/0xd0 [ice] #3: ff40d43ea1961210 (&pf->lag_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: ice_reset_vf+0xb7/0x4d0 [ice]
stack backtrace: CPU: 60 PID: 6771 Comm: kworker/60:3 Tainted: G W O 6.8.0-rc6 #54 Hardware name: Workqueue: ice ice_service_task [ice] Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x4a/0x80 check_noncircular+0x12d/0x150 check_prev_add+0xe2/0xc50 ? save_trace+0x59/0x230 ? add_chain_cache+0x109/0x450 validate_chain+0x558/0x800 __lock_acquire+0x4f8/0xb40 ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x7d/0x100 lock_acquire+0xd4/0x2d0 ? ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] ? lock_is_held_type+0xc7/0x120 __mutex_lock+0x9b/0xbf0 ? ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] ? ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] ? rcu_is_watching+0x11/0x50 ? ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] ? process_one_work+0x176/0x4d0 ice_process_vflr_event+0x98/0xd0 [ice] ice_service_task+0x1cc/0x480 [ice] process_one_work+0x1e9/0x4d0 worker_thread+0x1e1/0x3d0 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0x104/0x140 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1b/0x30 </TASK>
To avoid deadlock, we must acquire the LAG ---truncated---