GHSA-H4R8-4J67-99MX

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-30 15:30 – Updated: 2026-05-30 15:30
VLAI
Details

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

eventpoll: fix ep_remove struct eventpoll / struct file UAF

ep_remove() (via ep_remove_file()) cleared file->f_ep under file->f_lock but then kept using @file inside the critical section (is_file_epoll(), hlist_del_rcu() through the head, spin_unlock). A concurrent __fput() taking the eventpoll_release() fastpath in that window observed the transient NULL, skipped eventpoll_release_file() and ran to f_op->release / file_free().

For the epoll-watches-epoll case, f_op->release is ep_eventpoll_release() -> ep_clear_and_put() -> ep_free(), which kfree()s the watched struct eventpoll. Its embedded ->refs hlist_head is exactly where epi->fllink.pprev points, so the subsequent hlist_del_rcu()'s "*pprev = next" scribbles into freed kmalloc-192 memory.

In addition, struct file is SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU, so the slot backing @file could be recycled by alloc_empty_file() -- reinitializing f_lock and f_ep -- while ep_remove() is still nominally inside that lock. The upshot is an attacker-controllable kmem_cache_free() against the wrong slab cache.

Pin @file via epi_fget() at the top of ep_remove() and gate the critical section on the pin succeeding. With the pin held @file cannot reach refcount zero, which holds __fput() off and transitively keeps the watched struct eventpoll alive across the hlist_del_rcu() and the f_lock use, closing both UAFs.

If the pin fails @file has already reached refcount zero and its __fput() is in flight. Because we bailed before clearing f_ep, that path takes the eventpoll_release() slow path into eventpoll_release_file() and blocks on ep->mtx until the waiter side's ep_clear_and_put() drops it. The bailed epi's share of ep->refcount stays intact, so the trailing ep_refcount_dec_and_test() in ep_clear_and_put() cannot free the eventpoll out from under eventpoll_release_file(); the orphaned epi is then cleaned up there.

A successful pin also proves we are not racing eventpoll_release_file() on this epi, so drop the now-redundant re-check of epi->dying under f_lock. The cheap lockless READ_ONCE(epi->dying) fast-path bailout stays.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-46242"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-05-30T13:16:21Z",
    "severity": null
  },
  "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\neventpoll: fix ep_remove struct eventpoll / struct file UAF\n\nep_remove() (via ep_remove_file()) cleared file-\u003ef_ep under\nfile-\u003ef_lock but then kept using @file inside the critical section\n(is_file_epoll(), hlist_del_rcu() through the head, spin_unlock).\nA concurrent __fput() taking the eventpoll_release() fastpath in\nthat window observed the transient NULL, skipped\neventpoll_release_file() and ran to f_op-\u003erelease / file_free().\n\nFor the epoll-watches-epoll case, f_op-\u003erelease is\nep_eventpoll_release() -\u003e ep_clear_and_put() -\u003e ep_free(), which\nkfree()s the watched struct eventpoll. Its embedded -\u003erefs\nhlist_head is exactly where epi-\u003efllink.pprev points, so the\nsubsequent hlist_del_rcu()\u0027s \"*pprev = next\" scribbles into freed\nkmalloc-192 memory.\n\nIn addition, struct file is SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU, so the slot\nbacking @file could be recycled by alloc_empty_file() --\nreinitializing f_lock and f_ep -- while ep_remove() is still\nnominally inside that lock. The upshot is an attacker-controllable\nkmem_cache_free() against the wrong slab cache.\n\nPin @file via epi_fget() at the top of ep_remove() and gate the\ncritical section on the pin succeeding. With the pin held @file\ncannot reach refcount zero, which holds __fput() off and\ntransitively keeps the watched struct eventpoll alive across the\nhlist_del_rcu() and the f_lock use, closing both UAFs.\n\nIf the pin fails @file has already reached refcount zero and its\n__fput() is in flight. Because we bailed before clearing f_ep,\nthat path takes the eventpoll_release() slow path into\neventpoll_release_file() and blocks on ep-\u003emtx until the waiter\nside\u0027s ep_clear_and_put() drops it. The bailed epi\u0027s share of\nep-\u003erefcount stays intact, so the trailing ep_refcount_dec_and_test()\nin ep_clear_and_put() cannot free the eventpoll out from under\neventpoll_release_file(); the orphaned epi is then cleaned up\nthere.\n\nA successful pin also proves we are not racing\neventpoll_release_file() on this epi, so drop the now-redundant\nre-check of epi-\u003edying under f_lock. The cheap lockless\nREAD_ONCE(epi-\u003edying) fast-path bailout stays.",
  "id": "GHSA-h4r8-4j67-99mx",
  "modified": "2026-05-30T15:30:21Z",
  "published": "2026-05-30T15:30:21Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-46242"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a6dc643c69311677c574a0f17a3f4d66a5f3744b"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ced39b6a8062bac5c18a1c3df85634107eb8664a"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ef4ca02e95363e78977ca04340d44fe3b4b2b81f"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…