GHSA-M4WQ-7WV4-XPQ8

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-08-15 06:32 – Updated: 2026-08-17 06:33
VLAI
Details

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

sunrpc: harden rq_procinfo lifecycle to prevent double-free

The svc_release_rqst() function executes the callback inside rqstp->rq_procinfo->pc_release. However, if a worker thread begins processing a new request and encounters an early error path (e.g., unsupported protocol, short frame, or bad auth) before a valid rq_procinfo is installed, a stale release hook can be re-triggered against reused state from the previous RPC, resulting in a double-free or use-after-free vulnerability.

Harden the lifecycle of rq_procinfo by: 1. Ensuring svc_release_rqst() always clears rq_procinfo after the optional pc_release() call, regardless of whether the hook exists. 2. Explicitly clearing rq_procinfo at request entry in svc_process() before any early decode or drop paths. 3. Ensuring svc_process_bc() does the same at backchannel entry.

This guarantees that error flows will not encounter a non-NULL stale rq_procinfo pointer when there is nothing to release.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-72220"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-08-15T06:21:40Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nsunrpc: harden rq_procinfo lifecycle to prevent double-free\n\nThe svc_release_rqst() function executes the callback inside\nrqstp-\u003erq_procinfo-\u003epc_release. However, if a worker thread begins\nprocessing a new request and encounters an early error path (e.g.,\nunsupported protocol, short frame, or bad auth) before a valid\nrq_procinfo is installed, a stale release hook can be re-triggered\nagainst reused state from the previous RPC, resulting in a double-free\nor use-after-free vulnerability.\n\nHarden the lifecycle of rq_procinfo by:\n1. Ensuring svc_release_rqst() always clears rq_procinfo after the\n   optional pc_release() call, regardless of whether the hook exists.\n2. Explicitly clearing rq_procinfo at request entry in svc_process()\n   before any early decode or drop paths.\n3. Ensuring svc_process_bc() does the same at backchannel entry.\n\nThis guarantees that error flows will not encounter a non-NULL stale\nrq_procinfo pointer when there is nothing to release.",
  "id": "GHSA-m4wq-7wv4-xpq8",
  "modified": "2026-08-17T06:33:16Z",
  "published": "2026-08-15T06:32:16Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-72220"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/18d216788bef06332ff8901670ecf1ed8f6eb614"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/31ba490c02d476a5e4f90b8845932ac9db8aa71b"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/66014ab165cb01bfef5836939412a8ef98d5d5ff"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}



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…

Loading…