| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
netfilter: nf_tables: avoid chain re-validation if possible
Hamza Mahfooz reports cpu soft lock-ups in
nft_chain_validate():
watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 27s! [iptables-nft-re:37547]
[..]
RIP: 0010:nft_chain_validate+0xcb/0x110 [nf_tables]
[..]
nft_immediate_validate+0x36/0x50 [nf_tables]
nft_chain_validate+0xc9/0x110 [nf_tables]
nft_immediate_validate+0x36/0x50 [nf_tables]
nft_chain_validate+0xc9/0x110 [nf_tables]
nft_immediate_validate+0x36/0x50 [nf_tables]
nft_chain_validate+0xc9/0x110 [nf_tables]
nft_immediate_validate+0x36/0x50 [nf_tables]
nft_chain_validate+0xc9/0x110 [nf_tables]
nft_immediate_validate+0x36/0x50 [nf_tables]
nft_chain_validate+0xc9/0x110 [nf_tables]
nft_immediate_validate+0x36/0x50 [nf_tables]
nft_chain_validate+0xc9/0x110 [nf_tables]
nft_table_validate+0x6b/0xb0 [nf_tables]
nf_tables_validate+0x8b/0xa0 [nf_tables]
nf_tables_commit+0x1df/0x1eb0 [nf_tables]
[..]
Currently nf_tables will traverse the entire table (chain graph), starting
from the entry points (base chains), exploring all possible paths
(chain jumps). But there are cases where we could avoid revalidation.
Consider:
1 input -> j2 -> j3
2 input -> j2 -> j3
3 input -> j1 -> j2 -> j3
Then the second rule does not need to revalidate j2, and, by extension j3,
because this was already checked during validation of the first rule.
We need to validate it only for rule 3.
This is needed because chain loop detection also ensures we do not exceed
the jump stack: Just because we know that j2 is cycle free, its last jump
might now exceed the allowed stack size. We also need to update all
reachable chains with the new largest observed call depth.
Care has to be taken to revalidate even if the chain depth won't be an
issue: chain validation also ensures that expressions are not called from
invalid base chains. For example, the masquerade expression can only be
called from NAT postrouting base chains.
Therefore we also need to keep record of the base chain context (type,
hooknum) and revalidate if the chain becomes reachable from a different
hook location. |
| Improper access control in SecSettingsIntelligence prior to SMR Mar-2025 Release 1 allows local attackers to launch privileged activities. User interaction is required for triggering this vulnerability. |
| Improper neutralization in Microsoft Management Console allows an unauthorized attacker to bypass a security feature locally. |
| .NET Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Windows PrintWorkflowUserSvc Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability |
| Windows PrintWorkflowUserSvc Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability |
| Windows Cloud Files Mini Filter Driver Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability |
| Microsoft COM for Windows Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability |
| Windows Direct Show Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Active Directory Domain Services Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability |
| Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Windows OLE Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Microsoft DWM Core Library Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability |
| Windows Remote Desktop Services Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Microsoft Brokering File System Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability |
| Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| .NET, .NET Framework, and Visual Studio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Visual Studio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
