CVE-2025-23163

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

net: vlan: dont propagate flags on open

With the device instance lock, there is now a possibility of a deadlock:

[ 1.211455] ============================================ [ 1.211571] WARNING: possible recursive locking detected [ 1.211687] 6.14.0-rc5-01215-g032756b4ca7a-dirty #5 Not tainted [ 1.211823] ——————————————– [ 1.211936] ip/184 is trying to acquire lock: [ 1.212032] ffff8881024a4c30 (&dev->lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: dev_set_allmulti+0x4e/0xb0 [ 1.212207] [ 1.212207] but task is already holding lock: [ 1.212332] ffff8881024a4c30 (&dev->lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: dev_open+0x50/0xb0 [ 1.212487] [ 1.212487] other info that might help us debug this: [ 1.212626] Possible unsafe locking scenario: [ 1.212626] [ 1.212751] CPU0 [ 1.212815] —- [ 1.212871] lock(&dev->lock); [ 1.212944] lock(&dev->lock); [ 1.213016] [ 1.213016] *** DEADLOCK *** [ 1.213016] [ 1.213143] May be due to missing lock nesting notation [ 1.213143] [ 1.213294] 3 locks held by ip/184: [ 1.213371] #0: ffffffff838b53e0 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: rtnl_nets_lock+0x1b/0xa0 [ 1.213543] #1: ffffffff84e5fc70 (&net->rtnl_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: rtnl_nets_lock+0x37/0xa0 [ 1.213727] #2: ffff8881024a4c30 (&dev->lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: dev_open+0x50/0xb0 [ 1.213895] [ 1.213895] stack backtrace: [ 1.213991] CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 184 Comm: ip Not tainted 6.14.0-rc5-01215-g032756b4ca7a-dirty #5 [ 1.213993] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Arch Linux 1.16.3-1-1 04/01/2014 [ 1.213994] Call Trace: [ 1.213995] [ 1.213996] dump_stack_lvl+0x8e/0xd0 [ 1.214000] print_deadlock_bug+0x28b/0x2a0 [ 1.214020] lock_acquire+0xea/0x2a0 [ 1.214027] __mutex_lock+0xbf/0xd40 [ 1.214038] dev_set_allmulti+0x4e/0xb0 # real_dev->flags & IFF_ALLMULTI [ 1.214040] vlan_dev_open+0xa5/0x170 # ndo_open on vlandev [ 1.214042] __dev_open+0x145/0x270 [ 1.214046] __dev_change_flags+0xb0/0x1e0 [ 1.214051] netif_change_flags+0x22/0x60 # IFF_UP vlandev [ 1.214053] dev_change_flags+0x61/0xb0 # for each device in group from dev->vlan_info [ 1.214055] vlan_device_event+0x766/0x7c0 # on netdevsim0 [ 1.214058] notifier_call_chain+0x78/0x120 [ 1.214062] netif_open+0x6d/0x90 [ 1.214064] dev_open+0x5b/0xb0 # locks netdevsim0 [ 1.214066] bond_enslave+0x64c/0x1230 [ 1.214075] do_set_master+0x175/0x1e0 # on netdevsim0 [ 1.214077] do_setlink+0x516/0x13b0 [ 1.214094] rtnl_newlink+0xaba/0xb80 [ 1.214132] rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x440/0x490 [ 1.214144] netlink_rcv_skb+0xeb/0x120 [ 1.214150] netlink_unicast+0x1f9/0x320 [ 1.214153] netlink_sendmsg+0x346/0x3f0 [ 1.214157] __sock_sendmsg+0x86/0xb0 [ 1.214160] ____sys_sendmsg+0x1c8/0x220 [ 1.214164] ___sys_sendmsg+0x28f/0x2d0 [ 1.214179] __x64_sys_sendmsg+0xef/0x140 [ 1.214184] do_syscall_64+0xec/0x1d0 [ 1.214190] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f [ 1.214191] RIP: 0033:0x7f2d1b4a7e56

Device setup:

 netdevsim0 (down)
 ^        ^

bond netdevsim1.100@netdevsim1 allmulticast=on (down)

When we enslave the lower device (netdevsim0) which has a vlan, we propagate vlans allmuti/promisc flags during ndo_open. This causes (re)locking on of the real_dev.

Propagate allmulti/promisc on flags change, not on the open. There is a slight semantics change that vlans that are down now propagate the flags, but this seems unlikely to result in the real issues.

Reproducer:

echo 0 1 > /sys/bus/netdevsim/new_device

dev_path=$(ls -d /sys/bus/netdevsim/devices/netdevsim0/net/*) dev=$(echo $dev_path | rev | cut -d/ -f1 | rev)

ip link set dev $dev name netdevsim0 ip link set dev netdevsim0 up

ip link add link netdevsim0 name netdevsim0.100 type vlan id 100 ip link set dev netdevsim0.100 allm —truncated—

Weakness

The product does not properly acquire or release a lock on a resource, leading to unexpected resource state changes and behaviors.

Affected Software

Extended Description

Locking is a type of synchronization behavior that ensures that multiple independently-operating processes or threads do not interfere with each other when accessing the same resource. All processes/threads are expected to follow the same steps for locking. If these steps are not followed precisely - or if no locking is done at all - then another process/thread could modify the shared resource in a way that is not visible or predictable to the original process. This can lead to data or memory corruption, denial of service, etc.

Potential Mitigations

Related Attack Patterns

• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/25.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/26.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/27.html

References

• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/27b918007d96402aba10ed52a6af8015230f1793
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/299d7d27af6b5844cda06a0fdfa635705e1bc50f
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/523fa0979d842443aa14b80002e45b471cbac137
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/538b43aa21e3b17c110104efd218b966d2eda5f8
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/53fb25e90c0a503a17c639341ba5e755cb2feb5c
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/8980018a9806743d9b80837330d46f06ecf78516
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a32f1d4f1f4c9d978698f3c718621f6198f2e7ac
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/b1e3eeb037256a2f1206a8d69810ec47eb152026
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d537859e56bcc3091805c524484a4c85386b3cc8
• https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2025/05/msg00030.html
• https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2025/05/msg00045.html