CVE-2026-63980

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

net/handshake: Use spin_lock_bh for hn_lock

nvmet_tcp_state_change(), a socket callback that runs in BH context, can reach handshake_req_cancel() via nvmet_tcp_schedule_release_queue() and tls_handshake_cancel(). handshake_req_cancel() acquires hn->hn_lock with plain spin_lock(). If a process-context thread on the same CPU holds hn->hn_lock when a softirq invokes the cancel path, the lock attempt deadlocks. This is the only caller that invokes tls_handshake_cancel() from BH context; every other consumer calls it from process context.

Deferring the cancel to process context in the NVMe target is not straightforward: nvmet_tcp_schedule_release_queue() must call tls_handshake_cancel() atomically with its state transition to DISCONNECTING. If the cancel were deferred, the handshake completion callback could fire in the window before the cancel runs, observe the unexpected state, and return without dropping its kref on the queue. Reworking that interlock is considerably more invasive than hardening the handshake lock. Convert all hn->hn_lock acquisitions from spin_lock/spin_unlock to spin_lock_bh/spin_unlock_bh so the lock is never taken with softirqs enabled.

Weakness

The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.

Affected Software

Extended Description

A race condition occurs within concurrent environments, and it is effectively a property of a code sequence. Depending on the context, a code sequence may be in the form of a function call, a small number of instructions, a series of program invocations, etc. A race condition violates these properties, which are closely related:

A race condition exists when an “interfering code sequence” can still access the shared resource, violating exclusivity. The interfering code sequence could be “trusted” or “untrusted.” A trusted interfering code sequence occurs within the product; it cannot be modified by the attacker, and it can only be invoked indirectly. An untrusted interfering code sequence can be authored directly by the attacker, and typically it is external to the vulnerable product.

Potential Mitigations

• Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring.
• Additionally, this will minimize the amount of synchronization necessary and may even help to reduce the likelihood of a denial of service where an attacker may be able to repeatedly trigger a critical section (CWE-400).

Related Attack Patterns

• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/26.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/29.html

References

• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/06ab5978866fc2221b910347fd3e510ca8e7b1a4
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/0866569fc36a56f568acd3900d354e3505932e09
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/91898de9501a047ba67c6b864dcd403e00bdfbf5
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/cc993e0927ec8bd98ea33377ada03295fcda0f24