CVE-2022-48797: mm: don't try to NUMA-migrate COW pages that have other uses
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 22/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.24% (FIRST EPSS).
- Someone with local access to the system can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: Linux Linux 254090925e16abd914c87b4ad1b489440d89c4c3, 80d47f5de5e311cbc0d01ebb6ee684e8f4c196c6, b3dc4b9d3ca68b370c4aeab5355007eedf948849.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to Linux Linux 254090925e16abd914c87b4ad1b489440d89c4c3, 80d47f5de5e311cbc0d01ebb6ee684e8f4c196c6, b3dc4b9d3ca68b370c4aeab5355007eedf948849 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm: don't try to NUMA-migrate COW pages that have other uses Oded Gabbay reports that enabling NUMA balancing causes corruption with his Gaudi accelerator test load: "All the details are in the bug, but the bottom line is that somehow, this patch causes corruption when the numa balancing feature is enabled AND we don't use process affinity AND we use GUP to pin pages so our accelerator can DMA to/from system memory. Either disabling numa balancing, using process affinity to bind to specific numa-node or reverting this patch causes the bug to disappear" and Oded bisected the issue to commit 09854ba94c6a ("mm: do_wp_page() simplification"). Now, the NUMA balancing shouldn't actually be changing the writability of a page, and as such shouldn't matter for COW. But it appears it does. Suspicious. However, regardless of that, the condition for enabling NUMA faults in change_pte_range() is nonsensical. It uses "page_mapcount(page)" to decide if a COW page should be NUMA-protected or not, and that makes absolutely no sense. The number of mappings a page has is irrelevant: not only does GUP get a reference to a page as in Oded's case, but the other mappings migth be paged out and the only reference to them would be in the page count. Since we should never try to NUMA-balance a page that we can't move anyway due to other references, just fix the code to use 'page_count()'. Oded confirms that that fixes his issue. Now, this does imply that something in NUMA balancing ends up changing page protections (other than the obvious one of making the page inaccessible to get the NUMA faulting information). Otherwise the COW simplification wouldn't matter - since doing the GUP on the page would make sure it's writable. The cause of that permission change would be good to figure out too, since it clearly results in spurious COW events - but fixing the nonsensical test that just happened to work before is obviously the CorrectThing(tm) to do regardless.
- Published
- Jul 16, 2024
- Updated
- Aug 5, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.2% · 15th percentile
- CWE
- —
Report tools
Action score
22
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 22 / 40 · 5.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.2%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 5.5
- CNA · Linux
- 7.1
- 1.6 point gap
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| linux | linux kernel | cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- linux linux kernel5.9.1 and later · before 5.10.102
- linux linux kernel5.11 and later · before 5.15.25
- linux linux kernel5.16 and later · before 5.16.11
- linux linux kernel5.17
- linux linux kernel5.9
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (Linux). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
Linux Linux
- 5.9affected
- 09854ba94c6aad7886996bfbee2530b3d8a7f4f4 and later · before 254090925e16abd914c87b4ad1b489440d89c4c3affected · git
- 09854ba94c6aad7886996bfbee2530b3d8a7f4f4 and later · before b3dc4b9d3ca68b370c4aeab5355007eedf948849affected · git
- 09854ba94c6aad7886996bfbee2530b3d8a7f4f4 and later · before d187eeb02d18446e5e54ed6bcbf8b47e6551daeaaffected · git
- 09854ba94c6aad7886996bfbee2530b3d8a7f4f4 and later · before 80d47f5de5e311cbc0d01ebb6ee684e8f4c196c6affected · git
- before 5.9not affected · semver
- 5.10.102 and later · up to and including 5.10.*not affected · semver
- 5.15.25 and later · up to and including 5.15.*not affected · semver
- 5.16.11 and later · up to and including 5.16.*not affected · semver
- 5.17 and laternot affected · original_commit_for_fix
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian:12 | linux | before 5.16.11-1 | 5.16.11-1 |
Same product
linux: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2026-31431crypto: algif_aead - Revert to operating out-of-placeKEV90Now
- CVE-2022-0847A flaw was found in the way the "flags" member of the new pipe buffer structure was lacking proper initialization in copy_page_to_iter_pipe KEV89Now
- CVE-2021-22555Heap Out-Of-Bounds Write in Netfilter IP6T_SO_SET_REPLACEKEV85Now
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2022-48795Jul 16, 2024 · parisc: Fix data TLB miss in sba_unmap_sg22Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2022-48796Jul 16, 2024 · iommu: Fix potential use-after-free during probe31Monitor
- Later →CVE-2022-48798Jul 16, 2024 · s390/cio: verify the driver availability for path_event call22Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Linux Linux | 254090925e16abd914c87b4ad1b489440d89c4c3 | Vendor (CNA) |
| Linux Linux | 80d47f5de5e311cbc0d01ebb6ee684e8f4c196c6 | Vendor (CNA) |
| Linux Linux | b3dc4b9d3ca68b370c4aeab5355007eedf948849 | Vendor (CNA) |
| Linux Linux | d187eeb02d18446e5e54ed6bcbf8b47e6551daea | Vendor (CNA) |
| debian:linux | 5.16.11-1 · Debian:12 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Someone with local access to the system can trigger it.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- none
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Local
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
—
CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
nvd-primary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
MITRE has no CAPEC/ATT&CK mapping for this CWE.
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (3 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.