Patchlage

CVE-2026-64029

CVE CVE-2026-64029EUVD EUVD-2026-45602Published 2026-07-19T15:39:20.000ZLast changed 2026-08-05T12:38:23.000ZCVSS 7.8

What the advisory describes

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ALSA: seq: Serialize UMP output teardown with event_input seq_ump_process_event() borrows client->out_rfile.output without synchronizing with the first-open and last-close transition in seq_ump_client_open() and seq_ump_client_close(). The last output unuse can therefore drop opened[STR_OUT] to zero and release the rawmidi file while an in-flight event_input callback is still inside snd_rawmidi_kernel_write(). That leaves the rawmidi substream runtime exposed to teardown before the write path has taken its own buffer reference. Add a per-client rwlock for the event_input-visible output file. Publish a newly opened output file under the write side, and hold the read side from the output lookup through snd_rawmidi_kernel_write(). The last output close copies and clears the visible output file under the write side, then drops the lock and releases the saved rawmidi file. Use IRQ-safe rwlock guards because event_input can also be reached from atomic sequencer delivery. The buggy scenario involves two paths, with each column showing the order within that path: path A label: event_input path path B label: last unuse path 1. seq_ump_process_event() reads 1. seq_ump_client_close() client->out_rfile.output. drops opened[STR_OUT] to zero. 2. snd_rawmidi_kernel_write1() 2. snd_rawmidi_kernel_release() has not yet pinned runtime. closes the output file. 3. The writer continues using 3. close_substream() frees the borrowed substream. substream->runtime. This keeps the output substream and runtime alive for the full event_input write while keeping rawmidi release outside the rwlock. KASAN reproduced this as a slab-use-after-free in snd_rawmidi_kernel_write1(), with allocation through seq_ump_use()/snd_seq_port_connect() and free through seq_ump_unuse()/snd_seq_port_disconnect(). Validation reproduced this kernel report: KASAN slab-use-after-free in snd_rawmidi_kernel_write1+0x9d/0x400 RIP: 0033:0x7f5528af837f Read of size 8 Call trace: dump_stack_lvl+0x73/0xb0 (?:?) print_report+0xd1/0x650 (?:?) srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 (?:?) __virt_addr_valid+0x1a7/0x340 (?:?) kasan_complete_mode_report_info+0x64/0x200 (?:?) kasan_report+0xf7/0x130 (?:?) snd_rawmidi_kernel_write1+0x9d/0x400 (?:?) __asan_load8+0x82/0xb0 (?:?) update_stack_state+0x1ef/0x2d0 (?:?) snd_rawmidi_kernel_write+0x1a/0x20 (?:?) seq_ump_process_event+0xd4/0x120 (sound/core/seq/seq_ump_client.c:82) __snd_seq_deliver_single_event+0x8a/0xe0 (?:?) snd_seq_deliver_from_ump+0x2b2/0xd60 (?:?) lock_acquire+0x14e/0x2e0 (?:?) find_held_lock+0x31/0x90 (?:?) snd_seq_port_use_ptr+0xa6/0xe0 (?:?) __kasan_check_write+0x18/0x20 (?:?) do_raw_read_unlock+0x32/0xa0 (?:?) _raw_read_unlock+0x26/0x50 (?:?) snd_seq_deliver_single_event+0x45c/0x4b0 (?:?) snd_seq_deliver_event+0x10d/0x1b0 (?:?) snd_seq_client_enqueue_event+0x192/0x240 (?:?) snd_seq_write+0x2cd/0x450 (?:?) apparmor_file_permission+0x20/0x30 (?:?) security_file_permission+0x51/0x60 (?:?) vfs_write+0x1ce/0x850 (?:?) __fget_files+0x12b/0x220 (?:?) lock_release+0xc8/0x2a0 (?:?) __rcu_read_unlock+0x74/0x2d0 (?:?) __fget_files+0x135/0x220 (?:?) ksys_write+0x15a/0x180 (?:?) rcu_is_watching+0x24/0x60 (?:?) __x64_sys_write+0x46/0x60 (?:?) x64_sys_call+0x7d/0x20d0 (?:?) do_syscall_64+0xc1/0x360 (arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:87) entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f (?:?)

Source: EUVD (ENISA), in the words of the advisory.

Products the advisory names

These come from the advisory itself, not from any check we performed.

The versions shown are the advisory's own. Patchlage compares no version numbers and derives no judgement from them — which version is installed is something a person has to look up.

Carried in the product catalogue

An estate covering these products can be recorded in Patchlage. An advisory about them appears in the next morning's situation report.

Does this concern one of your customers?

This page cannot answer that — it does not know your estate. Whoever has recorded their environments gets the answer the morning after publication, together with a paragraph they can forward to the customer unedited.

Try it for 28 days

Patchlage reports hits and suspected hits. About everything else this system says nothing — neither this page nor the situation report ever claims that an estate is safe.