Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-185771-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 07:11:28 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: cve@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jason Xing <kernelxing@tencent.com>,
	linux-cve-announce@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CVE-2024-27429: netrom: Fix a data-race around
 sysctl_netrom_obsolescence_count_initialiser
Message-ID: <2024052219-storewide-arrogance-8d54@gregkh>
References: <2024051722-CVE-2024-27429-878c@gregkh>
 <ZkxdqOUek_MHqIMn@tiehlicka>
 <2024052105-pulsate-reborn-119a@gregkh>
 <ZkzGL_vXciG7ipm5@tiehlicka>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZkzGL_vXciG7ipm5@tiehlicka>

On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 06:05:03PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 21-05-24 16:40:24, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 10:39:04AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > This and couple of others are all having the same pattern. Adding
> > > READ_ONCE for an integer value with a claim that this might race with
> > > sysctl updates. While the claim about the race is correct I fail to see
> > > how this could have any security consequences. Even if a partial write
> > > was observed which sounds _more_ than theoretical these all are merely
> > > timeouts and delays.
> > > 
> > > Is there anything I am missing?
> > 
> > Nope, you are right, our fault, I'll go revoke this now.
> 
> please also revoke all others touching the same function.

I don't see any other CVEs that reference that function, but I do see
some that reference the same type of issue in the same file:
	CVE-2024-27420
	CVE-2024-27421
	CVE-2024-27430
are those what you are referring to?  If not, which ones do you think
also should be revoked?

thanks,

greg k-h