Skip to content

[CBR 7.9] CVE-2025-21786 #409

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: ciqcbr7_9
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

pvts-mat
Copy link
Contributor

[CBR 7.9]
CVE-2025-21786
VULN-54089

Problem

https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-21786

A vulnerability was found in the Linux kernel's work queue subsystem, which manages background task execution. The issue stems from improper handling of the "rescuer" thread during the cleanup of unbound work queues.

Applicability: no

As it was explained in the analysis of the CVE-2025-21786's fix in #406, the key to avoiding the use-after-free condition was reordering the calls of put_pwq(…) and worker_detach_from_pool(…). As long as put_pwq(…) occured before worker_detach_from_pool(…) it was possible for the work pool to reach 0 ref counts and be destroyed by RCU mechanism before worker_detach_from_pool(…) call that required the pool to still be present. In ciqcbr7_9 however, the worker_detach_from_pool(…) call doesn't even exist yet. The pool attachment / detachment scheme was introduced in 51697d3, which is missing from ciqcbr7_9's history. This means that CBR 7.9 not only doesn't contain the code introducing the bug (68f8305), but even the code which this bug would require to manifest. Unlike the worker_attach_to_pool(…) / worker_detach_from_pool(…) scheme, the synchronization mechanism used before - the worker_maybe_bind_and_lock(…) function - does not follow similar "attach" / "detach" scheme, so it's hard to even pinpoint the worker_detach_from_pool(…) analogue and evaluate whether it follows proper ordering in relation to put_pwq(…).

Taking this into account it was assessed that CVE-2025-21786 does not apply to CBR 7.9.

@pvts-mat pvts-mat marked this pull request as draft July 10, 2025 23:16
@pvts-mat
Copy link
Contributor Author

The "draft" status is only to prevent accidental merge, the PR is ready for review.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant