In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
posix-timers: Ensure timer ID search-loop limit is valid
posix_timer_add() tries to allocate a posix timer ID by starting from the
cached ID which was stored by the last successful allocation.
This is done in a loop searching the ID space for a free slot one by
one. The loop has to terminate when the search wrapped around to the
starting point.
But that's racy vs. establishing the starting point. That is read out
lockless, which leads to the following problem:
CPU0 CPU1
posix_timer_add()
start = sig->posix_timer_id;
lock(hash_lock);
... posix_timer_add()
if (++sig->posix_timer_id < 0)
start = sig->posix_timer_id;
sig->posix_timer_id = 0;
So CPU1 can observe a negative start value, i.e. -1, and the loop break
never happens because the condition can never be true:
if (sig->posix_timer_id == start)
break;
While this is unlikely to ever turn into an endless loop as the ID space is
huge (INT_MAX), the racy read of the start value caught the attention of
KCSAN and Dmitry unearthed that incorrectness.
Rewrite it so that all id operations are under the hash lock.
posix-timers: Ensure timer ID search-loop limit is valid
posix_timer_add() tries to allocate a posix timer ID by starting from the
cached ID which was stored by the last successful allocation.
This is done in a loop searching the ID space for a free slot one by
one. The loop has to terminate when the search wrapped around to the
starting point.
But that's racy vs. establishing the starting point. That is read out
lockless, which leads to the following problem:
CPU0 CPU1
posix_timer_add()
start = sig->posix_timer_id;
lock(hash_lock);
... posix_timer_add()
if (++sig->posix_timer_id < 0)
start = sig->posix_timer_id;
sig->posix_timer_id = 0;
So CPU1 can observe a negative start value, i.e. -1, and the loop break
never happens because the condition can never be true:
if (sig->posix_timer_id == start)
break;
While this is unlikely to ever turn into an endless loop as the ID space is
huge (INT_MAX), the racy read of the start value caught the attention of
KCSAN and Dmitry unearthed that incorrectness.
Rewrite it so that all id operations are under the hash lock.
Metrics
Affected Vendors & Products
Advisories
No advisories yet.
Fixes
Solution
No solution given by the vendor.
Workaround
No workaround given by the vendor.
References
History
Thu, 23 Oct 2025 00:15:00 +0000
Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
---|---|---|
References |
| |
Metrics |
threat_severity
|
cvssV3_1
|
Wed, 22 Oct 2025 13:45:00 +0000
Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
---|---|---|
Description | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: posix-timers: Ensure timer ID search-loop limit is valid posix_timer_add() tries to allocate a posix timer ID by starting from the cached ID which was stored by the last successful allocation. This is done in a loop searching the ID space for a free slot one by one. The loop has to terminate when the search wrapped around to the starting point. But that's racy vs. establishing the starting point. That is read out lockless, which leads to the following problem: CPU0 CPU1 posix_timer_add() start = sig->posix_timer_id; lock(hash_lock); ... posix_timer_add() if (++sig->posix_timer_id < 0) start = sig->posix_timer_id; sig->posix_timer_id = 0; So CPU1 can observe a negative start value, i.e. -1, and the loop break never happens because the condition can never be true: if (sig->posix_timer_id == start) break; While this is unlikely to ever turn into an endless loop as the ID space is huge (INT_MAX), the racy read of the start value caught the attention of KCSAN and Dmitry unearthed that incorrectness. Rewrite it so that all id operations are under the hash lock. | |
Title | posix-timers: Ensure timer ID search-loop limit is valid | |
References |
|
|

Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published:
Updated: 2025-10-22T13:23:57.127Z
Reserved: 2025-10-22T13:21:37.348Z
Link: CVE-2023-53728

No data.

Status : Awaiting Analysis
Published: 2025-10-22T14:15:48.083
Modified: 2025-10-22T21:12:48.953
Link: CVE-2023-53728


No data.