Поиск уязвимостей
Количество 6
Количество 6
CVE-2026-98427
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call The CoDel control law schedules the next drop one interval/sqrt(count) after the previous drop, using the configured interval (codel_params.interval). For very small intervals the scheduled step rounds down to zero, so the dropping loop in codel_dequeue() never advances and drains the entire backlog under the qdisc lock in one call - an unprivileged user can trigger a soft lockup this way. Fix in the shared codel code used by both codel and fq_codel: 1. Make the control-law step at least 1 tick so the dropping loop always moves forward. 2. Cap the dropping loop at CODEL_MAX_DROPS_PER_DEQUEUE (256) drops per codel_dequeue() call, resyncing drop_next to now when the cap is hit: the catch-up owed to the loop grows with the idle gap and the backlog, which no interval threshold can bound. This is a deliberate behaviour change after long idle gaps. The cap applies...
CVE-2026-98427
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call The CoDel control law schedules the next drop one interval/sqrt(count) after the previous drop, using the configured interval (codel_params.interval). For very small intervals the scheduled step rounds down to zero, so the dropping loop in codel_dequeue() never advances and drains the entire backlog under the qdisc lock in one call - an unprivileged user can trigger a soft lockup this way. Fix in the shared codel code used by both codel and fq_codel: 1. Make the control-law step at least 1 tick so the dropping loop always moves forward. 2. Cap the dropping loop at CODEL_MAX_DROPS_PER_DEQUEUE (256) drops per codel_dequeue() call, resyncing drop_next to now when the cap is hit: the catch-up owed to the loop grows with the idle gap and the backlog, which no interval threshold can bound. This is a deliberate behaviour change after long idle gaps. The cap applies...
CVE-2026-98427
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call The CoDel control law schedules the next drop one interval/sqrt(count) after the previous drop, using the configured interval (codel_params.interval). For very small intervals the scheduled step rounds down to zero, so the dropping loop in codel_dequeue() never advances and drains the entire backlog under the qdisc lock in one call - an unprivileged user can trigger a soft lockup this way. Fix in the shared codel code used by both codel and fq_codel: 1. Make the control-law step at least 1 tick so the dropping loop always moves forward. 2. Cap the dropping loop at CODEL_MAX_DROPS_PER_DEQUEUE (256) drops per codel_dequeue() call, resyncing drop_next to now when the cap is hit: the catch-up owed to the loop grows with the idle gap and the backlog, which no interval threshold can bound. This is a deliberate behaviour change after long idle gaps
CVE-2026-98427
net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call
CVE-2026-98427
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: n ...
GHSA-5wv6-6ggh-345r
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call The CoDel control law schedules the next drop one interval/sqrt(count) after the previous drop, using the configured interval (codel_params.interval). For very small intervals the scheduled step rounds down to zero, so the dropping loop in codel_dequeue() never advances and drains the entire backlog under the qdisc lock in one call - an unprivileged user can trigger a soft lockup this way. Fix in the shared codel code used by both codel and fq_codel: 1. Make the control-law step at least 1 tick so the dropping loop always moves forward. 2. Cap the dropping loop at CODEL_MAX_DROPS_PER_DEQUEUE (256) drops per codel_dequeue() call, resyncing drop_next to now when the cap is hit: the catch-up owed to the loop grows with the idle gap and the backlog, which no interval threshold can bound. This is a deliberate behaviour change after long idle g...
Уязвимостей на страницу
Уязвимость | CVSS | EPSS | Опубликовано | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2026-98427 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call The CoDel control law schedules the next drop one interval/sqrt(count) after the previous drop, using the configured interval (codel_params.interval). For very small intervals the scheduled step rounds down to zero, so the dropping loop in codel_dequeue() never advances and drains the entire backlog under the qdisc lock in one call - an unprivileged user can trigger a soft lockup this way. Fix in the shared codel code used by both codel and fq_codel: 1. Make the control-law step at least 1 tick so the dropping loop always moves forward. 2. Cap the dropping loop at CODEL_MAX_DROPS_PER_DEQUEUE (256) drops per codel_dequeue() call, resyncing drop_next to now when the cap is hit: the catch-up owed to the loop grows with the idle gap and the backlog, which no interval threshold can bound. This is a deliberate behaviour change after long idle gaps. The cap applies... | 0% Низкий | 29 дней назад | ||
CVE-2026-98427 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call The CoDel control law schedules the next drop one interval/sqrt(count) after the previous drop, using the configured interval (codel_params.interval). For very small intervals the scheduled step rounds down to zero, so the dropping loop in codel_dequeue() never advances and drains the entire backlog under the qdisc lock in one call - an unprivileged user can trigger a soft lockup this way. Fix in the shared codel code used by both codel and fq_codel: 1. Make the control-law step at least 1 tick so the dropping loop always moves forward. 2. Cap the dropping loop at CODEL_MAX_DROPS_PER_DEQUEUE (256) drops per codel_dequeue() call, resyncing drop_next to now when the cap is hit: the catch-up owed to the loop grows with the idle gap and the backlog, which no interval threshold can bound. This is a deliberate behaviour change after long idle gaps. The cap applies... | CVSS3: 5.5 | 0% Низкий | 29 дней назад | |
CVE-2026-98427 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call The CoDel control law schedules the next drop one interval/sqrt(count) after the previous drop, using the configured interval (codel_params.interval). For very small intervals the scheduled step rounds down to zero, so the dropping loop in codel_dequeue() never advances and drains the entire backlog under the qdisc lock in one call - an unprivileged user can trigger a soft lockup this way. Fix in the shared codel code used by both codel and fq_codel: 1. Make the control-law step at least 1 tick so the dropping loop always moves forward. 2. Cap the dropping loop at CODEL_MAX_DROPS_PER_DEQUEUE (256) drops per codel_dequeue() call, resyncing drop_next to now when the cap is hit: the catch-up owed to the loop grows with the idle gap and the backlog, which no interval threshold can bound. This is a deliberate behaviour change after long idle gaps | 0% Низкий | 29 дней назад | ||
CVE-2026-98427 net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call | CVSS3: 5.5 | 0% Низкий | 27 дней назад | |
CVE-2026-98427 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: n ... | 0% Низкий | 29 дней назад | ||
GHSA-5wv6-6ggh-345r In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call The CoDel control law schedules the next drop one interval/sqrt(count) after the previous drop, using the configured interval (codel_params.interval). For very small intervals the scheduled step rounds down to zero, so the dropping loop in codel_dequeue() never advances and drains the entire backlog under the qdisc lock in one call - an unprivileged user can trigger a soft lockup this way. Fix in the shared codel code used by both codel and fq_codel: 1. Make the control-law step at least 1 tick so the dropping loop always moves forward. 2. Cap the dropping loop at CODEL_MAX_DROPS_PER_DEQUEUE (256) drops per codel_dequeue() call, resyncing drop_next to now when the cap is hit: the catch-up owed to the loop grows with the idle gap and the backlog, which no interval threshold can bound. This is a deliberate behaviour change after long idle g... | 0% Низкий | 29 дней назад |
Уязвимостей на страницу