AlmaLinux 9.2 [TuxCare] 安全性更新：bpftool / kernel / kernel-abi-stablelists / kernel-core / etc 多個弱點 （ALMALINUX9.2：CLSA-2026：1787307395）
medium Nessus Plugin ID 361223
語言:
概要
AlmaLinux 主機缺少一或多個安全性更新。說明
AlmaLinux 9.2 主機已安裝的套件會受到 TuxCare ALMALINUX9.2：CLSA-2026：1787307395 公告中提及的多個弱點影響。- 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：ftrace: Clean up hash direct_functions on register failures We see the following GPF when register_ftrace_direct fails: [ ] general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address \ 0x200000000000010: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP DEBUG_PAGEALLOC PTI [...] [ ] RIP: 0010:ftrace_find_rec_direct+0x53/0x70 [ ] Code: 48 c1 e0 03 48 03 42 08 48 8b 10 31 c0 48 85 d2 74 [...] [ ] RSP: 0018:ffffc9000138bc10 EFLAGS: 00010206 [ ] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX:
ffffffff813e0df0 RCX: 000000000000003b [ ] RDX: 0200000000000000 RSI: 000000000000000c RDI:
ffffffff813e0df0 [ ] RBP: ffffffffa00a3000 R08: ffffffff81180ce0 R09: 0000000000000001 [ ] R10:
ffffc9000138bc18 R11: 0000000000000001 R12: ffffffff813e0df0 [ ] R13: ffffffff813e0df0 R14:
ffff888171b56400 R15: 0000000000000000 [ ] FS: 00007fa9420c7780(0000) GS:ffff888ff6a00000(0000) knlGS:000000000 [ ] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ ] CR2: 000000000770d000 CR3:
0000000107d50003 CR4: 0000000000370ee0 [ ] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2:
0000000000000000 [ ] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 [ ] Call Trace: [ ] <TASK> [ ] register_ftrace_direct+0x54/0x290 [ ] ? render_sigset_t+0xa0/0xa0 [ ] bpf_trampoline_update+0x3f5/0x4a0 [ ] ? 0xffffffffa00a3000 [ ] bpf_trampoline_link_prog+0xa9/0x140 [ ] bpf_tracing_prog_attach+0x1dc/0x450 [ ] bpf_raw_tracepoint_open+0x9a/0x1e0 [ ] ? find_held_lock+0x2d/0x90 [ ] ? lock_release+0x150/0x430 [ ] __sys_bpf+0xbd6/0x2700 [ ] ? lock_is_held_type+0xd8/0x130 [ ]
__x64_sys_bpf+0x1c/0x20 [ ] do_syscall_64+0x3a/0x80 [ ] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae [ ] RIP:
0033:0x7fa9421defa9 [ ] Code: 00 c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 44 00 00 9 f8 [...] [ ] RSP:
002b:00007ffed743bd78 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000141 [ ] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX:
00000000069d2480 RCX: 00007fa9421defa9 [ ] RDX: 0000000000000078 RSI: 00007ffed743bd80 RDI:
0000000000000011 [ ] RBP: 00007ffed743be00 R08: 0000000000bb7270 R09: 0000000000000000 [ ] R10:
00000000069da210 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000001 [ ] R13: 00007ffed743c4b0 R14:
00000000069d2480 R15: 0000000000000001 [ ] </TASK> [ ] Modules linked in: klp_vm(OK) [ ] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- One way to trigger this is: 1. load a livepatch that patches kernel function xxx; 2.
run bpftrace -e 'kfunc:xxx {}', this will fail (expected for now); 3. repeat #2 => gpf. This is because the entry is added to direct_functions, but not removed. Fix this by remove the entry from direct_functions when register_ftrace_direct fails. Also remove the last trailing space from ftrace.c, so we don't have to worry about it anymore. (CVE-2022-49402)
- 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：irqchip/gic-v3: Fix refcount leak in gic_populate_ppi_partitions of_find_node_by_phandle() returns a node pointer with refcount incremented, we should use of_node_put() on it when not need anymore. Add missing of_node_put() to avoid refcount leak.
(CVE-2022-49715)
- 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：cpufreq: CPPC: Add u64 casts to avoid overflowing The fields of the _CPC object are unsigned 32-bits values. To avoid overflows while using
_CPC's values, add 'u64' casts. (CVE-2022-49750)
- 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：net: stream: purge sk_error_queue in sk_stream_kill_queues() Changheon Lee reported TCP socket leaks, with a nice repro. It seems we leak TCP sockets with the following sequence: 1) SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_ACK is enabled on the socket. Each ACK will cook an skb put in error queue, from __skb_tstamp_tx(). __skb_tstamp_tx() is using skb_clone(), unless SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_TSONLY was also requested. 2) If the application is also using MSG_ZEROCOPY, then we put in the error queue cloned skbs that had a struct ubuf_info attached to them. Whenever an struct ubuf_info is allocated, sock_zerocopy_alloc() does a sock_hold(). As long as the cloned skbs are still in sk_error_queue, socket refcount is kept elevated. 3) Application closes the socket, while error queue is not empty. Since tcp_close() no longer purges the socket error queue, we might end up with a TCP socket with at least one skb in error queue keeping the socket alive forever. This bug can be (ab)used to consume all kernel memory and freeze the host. We need to purge the error queue, with proper synchronization against concurrent writers. (CVE-2022-50838)
- 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：bpf: Add preempt_count_{sub,add} into btf id deny list The recursion check in __bpf_prog_enter* and __bpf_prog_exit* leave preempt_count_{sub,add} unprotected. When attaching trampoline to them we get panic as follows, [867.843050] BUG: TASK stack guard page was hit at 0000000009d325cf (stack is 0000000046a46a15..00000000537e7b28) [ 867.843064] stack guard page: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI [867.843067] CPU: 8 PID: 11009 Comm: trace Kdump: loaded Not tainted 6.2.0+ #4 [ 867.843100] Call Trace: [867.843101] <TASK> [ 867.843104] asm_exc_int3+0x3a/0x40 [ 867.843108] RIP: 0010:preempt_count_sub+0x1/0xa0 [ 867.843135] __bpf_prog_enter_recur+0x17/0x90 [ 867.843148] bpf_trampoline_6442468108_0+0x2e/0x1000 [867.843154] ? preempt_count_sub+0x1/0xa0 [ 867.843157] preempt_count_sub+0x5/0xa0 [ 867.843159] ? migrate_enable+0xac/0xf0 [ 867.843164] __bpf_prog_exit_recur+0x2d/0x40 [ 867.843168] bpf_trampoline_6442468108_0+0x55/0x1000 ... [ 867.843788] preempt_count_sub+0x5/0xa0 [ 867.843793] ? migrate_enable+0xac/0xf0 [ 867.843829] __bpf_prog_exit_recur+0x2d/0x40 [ 867.843837] BUG: IRQ stack guard page was hit at 0000000099bd8228 (stack is 00000000b23e2bc4..000000006d95af35) [ 867.843841] BUG: IRQ stack guard page was hit at 000000005ae07924 (stack is 00000000ffd69623..0000000014eb594c) [ 867.843843] BUG: IRQ stack guard page was hit at 00000000028320f0 (stack is 00000000034b6438..0000000078d1bcec) [867.843842] bpf_trampoline_6442468108_0+0x55/0x1000 ... That is because in __bpf_prog_exit_recur, the preempt_count_{sub,add} are called after prog->active is decreased. Fixing this by adding these two functions into btf ids deny list. (CVE-2023-54086)
請注意，Nessus 並未測試這些問題，而是僅依據應用程式自我報告的版本號碼作出判斷。
解決方案
根據 TuxCare 公告 ALMALINUX9.2：CLSA-2026：1787307395 中的指引更新受影響的套件。另請參閱
Plugin 詳細資訊
嚴重性: Medium
ID: 361223
檔案名稱: tuxcare_alma_linux_9.2_CLSA-2026-1787307395.nasl
版本: 1.1
類型: Local
已發布: 2026/10/1
已更新: 2026/10/1
支援的感應器: Continuous Assessment, Nessus Agent, Tenable Cloud Security, Tenable Self-Hosted Container Security, Nessus
風險資訊
VPR
風險因素: High
分數: 7.9
百分位數: 99.36
Vendor
Vendor Severity: Important
CVSS v2
風險因素: Medium
基本分數: 4.6
時間性分數: 3.6
媒介: CVSS2#AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:N/A:C
CVSS 評分資料來源: CVE-2026-64275
CVSS v3
風險因素: Medium
基本分數: 5.5
時間性分數: 5
媒介: CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
時間媒介: CVSS:3.0/E:P/RL:O/RC:C
弱點資訊
必要的 KB 項目: Host/OS/extended-third-party, Host/local_checks_enabled, Host/AlmaLinux/release, Host/AlmaLinux/rpm-list, Host/cpu
可被惡意程式利用: true
可輕鬆利用: Exploits are available
修補程式發佈日期: 2026/8/21
弱點發布日期: 2021/7/21
參考資訊
CVE: CVE-2022-49402, CVE-2022-49715, CVE-2022-49750, CVE-2022-50838, CVE-2023-54086, CVE-2023-54177, CVE-2023-54243, CVE-2024-35998, CVE-2024-36938, CVE-2024-39497, CVE-2024-42268, CVE-2024-45029, CVE-2024-47704, CVE-2024-49954, CVE-2024-50002, CVE-2024-50093, CVE-2024-56583, CVE-2024-56725, CVE-2025-21723, CVE-2025-21767, CVE-2025-22005, CVE-2025-38046, CVE-2025-38543, CVE-2025-38735, CVE-2025-39721, CVE-2025-39929, CVE-2025-39978, CVE-2025-40105, CVE-2025-40153, CVE-2025-40200, CVE-2025-40261, CVE-2025-68192, CVE-2025-68206, CVE-2025-68239, CVE-2025-68245, CVE-2025-68291, CVE-2025-68295, CVE-2025-68312, CVE-2025-68378, CVE-2025-68803, CVE-2025-71066, CVE-2026-23054, CVE-2026-23142, CVE-2026-23230, CVE-2026-23274, CVE-2026-23296, CVE-2026-23313, CVE-2026-23336, CVE-2026-23414, CVE-2026-31389, CVE-2026-31394, CVE-2026-31426, CVE-2026-31458, CVE-2026-31675, CVE-2026-31698, CVE-2026-43010, CVE-2026-43093, CVE-2026-43350, CVE-2026-43437, CVE-2026-43459, CVE-2026-46137, CVE-2026-46322, CVE-2026-52909, CVE-2026-52981, CVE-2026-53076, CVE-2026-53083, CVE-2026-53096, CVE-2026-53102, CVE-2026-53329, CVE-2026-64210, CVE-2026-64219, CVE-2026-64266, CVE-2026-64268, CVE-2026-64275, CVE-2026-64279, CVE-2026-64298, CVE-2026-64564, CVE-2026-68138, CVE-2026-68158, CVE-2026-68243, CVE-2026-68269, CVE-2026-68432, CVE-2026-68433
CLSA: 2026:1787307395