🔍 CVE-2025-39915

5.5
CVSS Score
MEDIUM
2025-10-01
2026-10-19 21:10
✅ 완료

🇰🇷 한글 설명

리눅스 커널의 net: phy 계층에서 발생한 교착 상태(Deadlock) 취약점입니다. 특정 상황에서 두 개의 서로 다른 잠금(Lock)이 서로를 기다리는 순환 의존성(AB/BA)이 발생하여 시스템이 멈출 수 있습니다.

💡 쉬운 설명

컴퓨터의 네트워크 장치를 관리하는 과정에서 두 작업이 서로의 차례를 기다리며 무한히 대기하는 상황이 발생할 수 있습니다. 이로 인해 시스템이 응답하지 않고 멈추는 현상이 나타날 수 있습니다.

🇺🇸 원문 (English)

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: phy: transfer phy_config_inband() locking responsibility to phylink Problem description =================== Lockdep reports a possible circular locking dependency (AB/BA) between &pl->state_mutex and &phy->lock, as follows. phylink_resolve() // acquires &pl->state_mutex -> phylink_major_config() -> phy_config_inband() // acquires &pl->phydev->lock whereas all the other call sites where &pl->state_mutex and &pl->phydev->lock have the locking scheme reversed. Everywhere else, &pl->phydev->lock is acquired at the top level, and &pl->state_mutex at the lower level. A clear example is phylink_bringup_phy(). The outlier is the newly introduced phy_config_inband() and the existing lock order is the correct one. To understand why it cannot be the other way around, it is sufficient to consider phylink_phy_change(), phylink's callback from the PHY device's phy->phy_link_change() virtual method, invoked by the PHY state machine. phy_link_up() and phy_link_down(), the (indirect) callers of phylink_phy_change(), are called with &phydev->lock acquired. Then phylink_phy_change() acquires its own &pl->state_mutex, to serialize changes made to its pl->phy_state and pl->link_config. So all other instances of &pl->state_mutex and &phydev->lock must be consistent with this order. Problem impact ============== I think the kernel runs a serious deadlock risk if an existing phylink_resolve() thread, which results in a phy_config_inband() call, is concurrent with a phy_link_up() or phy_link_down() call, which will deadlock on &pl->state_mutex in phylink_phy_change(). Practically speaking, the impact may be limited by the slow speed of the medium auto-negotiation protocol, which makes it unlikely for the current state to still be unresolved when a new one is detected, but I think the problem is there. Nonetheless, the problem was discovered using lockdep. Proposed solution ================= Practically speaking, the phy_config_inband() requirement of having phydev->lock acquired must transfer to the caller (phylink is the only caller). There, it must bubble up until immediately before &pl->state_mutex is acquired, for the cases where that takes place. Solution details, considerations, notes ======================================= This is the phy_config_inband() call graph: sfp_upstream_ops :: connect_phy() | v phylink_sfp_connect_phy() | v phylink_sfp_config_phy() | | sfp_upstream_ops :: module_insert() | | | v | phylink_sfp_module_insert() | | | | sfp_upstream_ops :: module_start() | | | | | v | | phylink_sfp_module_start() | | | | v v | phylink_sfp_config_optical() phylink_start() | | | phylink_resume() v v | | phylink_sfp_set_config() | | | v v v phylink_mac_initial_config() | phylink_resolve() | | phylink_ethtool_ksettings_set() v v v phylink_major_config() | v phy_config_inband() phylink_major_config() caller #1, phylink_mac_initial_config(), does not acquire &pl->state_mutex nor do its callers. It must acquire &pl->phydev->lock prior to calling phylink_major_config(). phylink_major_config() caller #2, phylink_resolve() acquires &pl->state_mutex, thus also needs to acquire &pl->phydev->lock. phylink_major_config() caller #3, phylink_ethtool_ksettings_set(), is completely uninteresting, because it only call ---truncated---

📍 영향받는 시스템

Linux Kernel (phylink 및 phy_config_inband 관련 모듈 사용 버전)

⚔️ 공격 벡터

로컬 또는 네트워크 환경에서 PHY 상태 변화(Link up/down)를 유도하여 교착 상태를 트리거할 수 있음

🛡️ 대응 방법

리눅스 커널을 최신 보안 패치가 적용된 버전으로 업데이트하여 잠금 순서를 수정해야 함

🔧 검증 코드

출력된 커널 버전이 해당 취약점이 해결된 패치 버전 이후인지 확인하십시오.

Shell / Script
uname -r

📊 CVSS Vector String

CVSS Vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

💻 영향받는 소프트웨어

Linux Kernel