<?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 16:47:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2024-42096 — x86: stop playing stack games in profile_pc()</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2024-42096</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux, Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 TM MFP - GNU/Linux subsystem, Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP, Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518F-4 PN/DP MFP, Siemens SIPLUS S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;x86: stop playing stack games in profile_pc()&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &amp;#39;profile_pc()&amp;#39; function is used for timer-based profiling, which
isn&amp;#39;t really all that relevant any more to begin with, but it also ends
up making assumptions based on the stack layout that aren&amp;#39;t necessarily
valid.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Basically, the code tries to account the time spent in spinlocks to the
caller rather than the spinlock, and while I support that as a concept,
it&amp;#39;s not worth the code complexity or the KASAN warnings when no serious
profiling is done using timers anyway these days.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And the code really does depend on stack layout that is only true in the
simplest of cases.  We&amp;#39;ve lost the comment at some point (I think when
the 32-bit and 64-bit code was unified), but it used to say:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Assume the lock function has either no stack frame or a copy
	of eflags from PUSHF.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;which explains why it just blindly loads a word or two straight off the
stack pointer and then takes a minimal look at the values to just check
if they might be eflags or the return pc:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Eflags always has bits 22 and up cleared unlike kernel addresses&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;but that basic stack layout assumption assumes that there isn&amp;#39;t any lock
debugging etc going on that would complicate the code and cause a stack
frame.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It causes KASAN unhappiness reported for years by syzkaller [1] and
others [2].&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;With no real practical reason for this any more, just remove the code.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Just for historical interest, here&amp;#39;s some…&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, Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP, Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518F-4 PN/DP MFP, Siemens SIPLUS S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;x86: stop playing stack games in profile_pc()&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &amp;#39;profile_pc()&amp;#39; function is used for timer-based profiling, which
isn&amp;#39;t really all that relevant any more to begin with, but it also ends
up making assumptions based on the stack layout that aren&amp;#39;t necessarily
valid.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Basically, the code tries to account the time spent in spinlocks to the
caller rather than the spinlock, and while I support that as a concept,
it&amp;#39;s not worth the code complexity or the KASAN warnings when no serious
profiling is done using timers anyway these days.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And the code really does depend on stack layout that is only true in the
simplest of cases.  We&amp;#39;ve lost the comment at some point (I think when
the 32-bit and 64-bit code was unified), but it used to say:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Assume the lock function has either no stack frame or a copy
	of eflags from PUSHF.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;which explains why it just blindly loads a word or two straight off the
stack pointer and then takes a minimal look at the values to just check
if they might be eflags or the return pc:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Eflags always has bits 22 and up cleared unlike kernel addresses&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;but that basic stack layout assumption assumes that there isn&amp;#39;t any lock
debugging etc going on that would complicate the code and cause a stack
frame.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It causes KASAN unhappiness reported for years by syzkaller [1] and
others [2].&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;With no real practical reason for this any more, just remove the code.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Just for historical interest, here&amp;#39;s some…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2024-42096</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
