<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2026 13:08:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2024-26935 — scsi: core: Fix unremoved procfs host directory regression</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2024-26935</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux, Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 TM MFP - GNU/Linux subsystem&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;scsi: core: Fix unremoved procfs host directory regression&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Commit fc663711b944 (&amp;#34;scsi: core: Remove the /proc/scsi/${proc_name}
directory earlier&amp;#34;) fixed a bug related to modules loading/unloading, by
adding a call to scsi_proc_hostdir_rm() on scsi_remove_host(). But that led
to a potential duplicate call to the hostdir_rm() routine, since it&amp;#39;s also
called from scsi_host_dev_release(). That triggered a regression report,
which was then fixed by commit be03df3d4bfe (&amp;#34;scsi: core: Fix a procfs host
directory removal regression&amp;#34;). The fix just dropped the hostdir_rm() call
from dev_release().&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But it happens that this proc directory is created on scsi_host_alloc(),
and that function &amp;#34;pairs&amp;#34; with scsi_host_dev_release(), while
scsi_remove_host() pairs with scsi_add_host(). In other words, it seems the
reason for removing the proc directory on dev_release() was meant to cover
cases in which a SCSI host structure was allocated, but the call to
scsi_add_host() didn&amp;#39;t happen. And that pattern happens to exist in some
error paths, for example.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Syzkaller causes that by using USB raw gadget device, error&amp;#39;ing on
usb-storage driver, at usb_stor_probe2(). By checking that path, we can see
that the BadDevice label leads to a scsi_host_put() after a SCSI host
allocation, but there&amp;#39;s no call to scsi_add_host() in such path. That leads
to messages like this in dmesg (and a leak of the SCSI host proc
structure):&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;usb-storage…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux, Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 TM MFP - GNU/Linux subsystem&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;scsi: core: Fix unremoved procfs host directory regression&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Commit fc663711b944 (&amp;#34;scsi: core: Remove the /proc/scsi/${proc_name}
directory earlier&amp;#34;) fixed a bug related to modules loading/unloading, by
adding a call to scsi_proc_hostdir_rm() on scsi_remove_host(). But that led
to a potential duplicate call to the hostdir_rm() routine, since it&amp;#39;s also
called from scsi_host_dev_release(). That triggered a regression report,
which was then fixed by commit be03df3d4bfe (&amp;#34;scsi: core: Fix a procfs host
directory removal regression&amp;#34;). The fix just dropped the hostdir_rm() call
from dev_release().&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But it happens that this proc directory is created on scsi_host_alloc(),
and that function &amp;#34;pairs&amp;#34; with scsi_host_dev_release(), while
scsi_remove_host() pairs with scsi_add_host(). In other words, it seems the
reason for removing the proc directory on dev_release() was meant to cover
cases in which a SCSI host structure was allocated, but the call to
scsi_add_host() didn&amp;#39;t happen. And that pattern happens to exist in some
error paths, for example.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Syzkaller causes that by using USB raw gadget device, error&amp;#39;ing on
usb-storage driver, at usb_stor_probe2(). By checking that path, we can see
that the BadDevice label leads to a scsi_host_put() after a SCSI host
allocation, but there&amp;#39;s no call to scsi_add_host() in such path. That leads
to messages like this in dmesg (and a leak of the SCSI host proc
structure):&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;usb-storage…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2024-26935</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
