<?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>Wed, 07 Oct 2026 14:42:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2024-26837 — net: bridge: switchdev: Skip MDB replays of deferred events on offload</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2024-26837</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;net: bridge: switchdev: Skip MDB replays of deferred events on offload&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Before this change, generation of the list of MDB events to replay
would race against the creation of new group memberships, either from
the IGMP/MLD snooping logic or from user configuration.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While new memberships are immediately visible to walkers of
br-&amp;gt;mdb_list, the notification of their existence to switchdev event
subscribers is deferred until a later point in time. So if a replay
list was generated during a time that overlapped with such a window,
it would also contain a replay of the not-yet-delivered event.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The driver would thus receive two copies of what the bridge internally
considered to be one single event. On destruction of the bridge, only
a single membership deletion event was therefore sent. As a
consequence of this, drivers which reference count memberships (at
least DSA), would be left with orphan groups in their hardware
database when the bridge was destroyed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is only an issue when replaying additions. While deletion events
may still be pending on the deferred queue, they will already have
been removed from br-&amp;gt;mdb_list, so no duplicates can be generated in
that scenario.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To a user this meant that old group memberships, from a bridge in
which a port was previously attached, could be reanimated (in
hardware) when the port joined a new bridge, without the new bridge&amp;#39;s
knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For example, on an mv88e6xxx s…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;net: bridge: switchdev: Skip MDB replays of deferred events on offload&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Before this change, generation of the list of MDB events to replay
would race against the creation of new group memberships, either from
the IGMP/MLD snooping logic or from user configuration.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While new memberships are immediately visible to walkers of
br-&amp;gt;mdb_list, the notification of their existence to switchdev event
subscribers is deferred until a later point in time. So if a replay
list was generated during a time that overlapped with such a window,
it would also contain a replay of the not-yet-delivered event.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The driver would thus receive two copies of what the bridge internally
considered to be one single event. On destruction of the bridge, only
a single membership deletion event was therefore sent. As a
consequence of this, drivers which reference count memberships (at
least DSA), would be left with orphan groups in their hardware
database when the bridge was destroyed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is only an issue when replaying additions. While deletion events
may still be pending on the deferred queue, they will already have
been removed from br-&amp;gt;mdb_list, so no duplicates can be generated in
that scenario.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To a user this meant that old group memberships, from a bridge in
which a port was previously attached, could be reanimated (in
hardware) when the port joined a new bridge, without the new bridge&amp;#39;s
knowledge.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For example, on an mv88e6xxx s…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/cve-2024-26837</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
