Patchlage

CVE-2026-74568

CVE CVE-2026-74568EUVD EUVD-2026-59633Veröffentlicht 2026-08-15T12:28:08.000ZZuletzt geändert 2026-08-17T05:48:47.000ZCVSS 9.3

Was das Advisory beschreibt

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: KVM: arm64: vgic: Fix race between LPI release and re-registration Fix a potential race between decrementing an LPI's reference count and evicting that structure from the LPI xarray. LPI structures are maintained in the VGIC LPI xarray (dist->lpi_xa). When the reference count of an LPI structure drops to zero, vgic_release_lpi_locked() removes the structure from the xarray and frees it under the xarray lock. However, the release of an LPI can race with a concurrent LPI re-registration with the same INTID via vgic_add_lpi() on another CPU, since the reference count drop and the xarray eviction are not performed in a single atomic step. This can happen e.g. if the guest issues a DISCARD while the LPI is still referenced from a vCPU's active-pending list (ap_list), and the same INTID is re-mapped via MAPTI. Particularly, vgic_release_lpi_locked() is called from two distinct paths: direct release via vgic_put_irq(), and deferred release via vgic_release_deleted_lpis(). During direct release, the issue can result in deleting a newly registered LPI from the xarray: CPU0 (Releasing LPI) CPU1 (Adding new LPI) ==================== ===================== vgic_put_irq() __vgic_put_irq() refcount_dec_and_test() vgic_add_lpi() xa_lock_irqsave() old_irq = xa_load(.., intid) vgic_try_get_irq_ref(old_irq) == false new IRQ inserted --> __xa_store(.., intid, ..) xa_unlock_irqrestore() xa_lock_irqsave(); vgic_release_lpi_locked() __xa_erase(.., irq->intid) <-- BUG: new IRQ is erased kfree_rcu(old_irq) During the deferred release path, the old IRQ can be leaked: CPU0 (Releasing LPI) CPU1 (Adding new LPI) ==================== ===================== vgic_put_irq_norelease() __vgic_put_irq() refcount_dec_and_test() irq->pending_release = true vgic_add_lpi() xa_lock_irqsave() old_irq = xa_load(.., intid) vgic_try_get_irq_ref(oldirq) == false BUG: old IRQ overwritten --> __xa_store(.., intid, ..) xa_unlock_irqrestore() vgic_release_deleted_lpis() xa_lock_irqsave() xa_for_each() { .. } <-- old IRQ with pending_release = true is gone, so it cannot be released To fix the direct release path, move the reference count drop inside the xarray lock, making sure that vgic_add_lpi() never encounters the to-be-released LPI. In the deferred release path, the refcount drop must happen under a raw spinlock, so the xarray lock cannot be grabbed, and the same solution does not work. Instead, update vgic_add_lpi(), so that if it evicts an LPI from the xarray, it takes on the responsibility of freeing it. Consequently, an LPI may now be freed concurrently after a deferred release drops the refcount, so accessing the pending_release field is no longer safe from use-after-free. Delete all uses of the flag, and update vgic_release_deleted_lpis() to identify orphaned LPIs purely based on their refcount.

Quelle: EUVD (ENISA), im Wortlaut der Meldung.

Produkte, die das Advisory nennt

Diese Angaben stammen aus der Meldung selbst, nicht aus einer Prüfung durch uns.

Die genannten Versionen sind die Angabe der Meldung. Patchlage vergleicht keine Versionsnummern und leitet aus ihnen keine Aussage ab — welche Version installiert ist, muss ein Mensch nachsehen.

Im Produktkatalog geführt

Für diese Produkte kann ein Bestand in Patchlage erfasst werden. Ein Advisory dazu erscheint am Morgen danach im Lagebericht.

Betrifft das einen Ihrer Kundenbestände?

Diese Seite kann die Frage nicht beantworten — sie kennt Ihren Bestand nicht. Wer seine Umgebungen erfasst hat, bekommt die Antwort am Morgen nach der Veröffentlichung, zusammen mit einem Absatz, den er unverändert an den Kunden weitergeben kann.

28 Tage testen

Patchlage meldet Treffer und Verdachtsfälle. Zu allem anderen sagt dieses System nichts — weder diese Seite noch der Lagebericht behauptet je, dass ein Bestand sicher ist.