In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: afs: Fix UAF when sending a message In afs_make_call(), there's a race with async call reception and destruction. If a call is dispatched that doesn't have call->write_iter set (used to specify the data content for FS.StoreData), then the first rxrpc_kernel_send_data() will not set MSG_MORE in the msghdr. Once rxrpc_send_data() queues the last request packet, the response could come in at any time and cause the call to be completed and put. However, afs_make_call() will look at the call again to see it ->write_iter should be handled - something it's only allowed to do if it has its own ref on the call. Whilst this is the case for synchronous calls, it isn't true for async calls such as FS.FetchData. There's also a potential UAF in afs_make_call() in the event that an asynchronous call is being sent, but the call fails in some way (e.g. it gets aborted from the server). The problem there is that afs_make_call() t...

A flaw was found in the Linux kernel's AFS (Andrew File System) component. A race condition exists in the `afs_make_call()` function during asynchronous call reception and destruction when sending a message. This can lead to a Use-After-Free (UAF) vulnerability, where memory is improperly accessed after it has been deallocated. A local attacker could potentially exploit this to cause memory corruption, leading to a denial of service or other unpredictable system behavior.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: afs: Fix UAF when sending a message In afs_make_call(), there's a race with async call reception and destruction. If a call is dispatched that doesn't have call->write_iter set (used to specify the data content for FS.StoreData), then the first rxrpc_kernel_send_data() will not set MSG_MORE in the msghdr. Once rxrpc_send_data() queues the last request packet, the response could come in at any time and cause the call to be completed and put. However, afs_make_call() will look at the call again to see it ->write_iter should be handled - something it's only allowed to do if it has its own ref on the call. Whilst this is the case for synchronous calls, it isn't true for async calls such as FS.FetchData. There's also a potential UAF in afs_make_call() in the event that an asynchronous call is being sent, but the call fails in some way (e.g. it gets aborted from the server). The problem there is that afs_make_call()

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

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: afs: Fix UAF when sending a message In afs_make_call(), there's a race with async call reception and destruction. If a call is dispatched that doesn't have call->write_iter set (used to specify the data content for FS.StoreData), then the first rxrpc_kernel_send_data() will not set MSG_MORE in the msghdr. Once rxrpc_send_data() queues the last request packet, the response could come in at any time and cause the call to be completed and put. However, afs_make_call() will look at the call again to see it ->write_iter should be handled - something it's only allowed to do if it has its own ref on the call. Whilst this is the case for synchronous calls, it isn't true for async calls such as FS.FetchData. There's also a potential UAF in afs_make_call() in the event that an asynchronous call is being sent, but the call fails in some way (e.g. it gets aborted from the server). The problem there is that afs_make_call...