linux-cve-announce - Re: CVE-2024-53054: cgroup/bpf: use a dedicated workqueue for cgroup bpf destruction

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2024112826-pond-battered-c61b@gregkh>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 17:51:43 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
Cc: cve@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-cve-announce@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CVE-2024-53054: cgroup/bpf: use a dedicated workqueue for cgroup
 bpf destruction

On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 06:37:57PM +0100, Michal Koutný wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2001 at 10:00:00PM GMT, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > This issue can be reproduced by the following pressuse test:
> > 1. A large number of cpuset cgroups are deleted.
> > 2. Set cpu on and off repeatly.
> > 3. Set watchdog_thresh repeatly.
> 
> The lockup is triggered in this very specific stress testing scenario.
> CPU offlining (write holding of cpu_hotplug_lock) is necessary to cause
> _this_ lockup. Both 2 and 3 are privileged operations (in a tight loop
> to hit the window).
> 
> I don't think this qualifies as vulnerability.

Thanks for the review, now revoked!

greg k-h