linux — security advisory
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf: Fix perf_pending_task() UaF Per syzbot it is possible for perf_pending_task() to run after the event is free()'d. There are two related but distinct cases: - the task_work was already queued before destroying the event; - destroying the event itself queues the task_work. The first cannot be solved using task_work_cancel() since perf_release() itself might be called from a task_work (____fput), which means the current->task_works list is already empty and task_work_cancel() won't be able to find the perf_pending_task() entry. The simplest alternative is extending the perf_event lifetime to cover the task_work. The second is just silly, queueing a task_work while you know the event is going away makes no sense and is easily avoided by re-arranging how the event is marked STATE_DEAD and ensuring it goes through STATE_OFF on the way down.
- Products
- linux
- Affected versions
- Not specified
- Fixed versions
- 6.1.4-1
- CVEs
- CVE-2022-48950
- Confirmed fixed CVEs
- Not specified
- Updated in this feed
- 30 Oct 2026, 15:25 UTC · Revision 1
Source evidence
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf: Fix perf_pending_task() UaF Per syzbot it is possible for perf_pending_task() to run after the event is free()'d. There are two related but distinct cases: - the task_work was already queued before destroying the event; - destroying the event itself queues the task_work. The first cannot be solved using task_work_cancel() since perf_release() itself might be called from a task_work (____fput), which means the current->task_works list is already empty and task_work_cancel() won't be able to find the perf_pending_task() entry. The simplest alternative is extending the perf_event lifetime to cover the task_work. The second is just silly, queueing a task_work while you know the event is going away makes no sense and is easily avoided by re-arranging how the event is marked STATE_DEAD and ensuring it goes through STATE_OFF on the way down.
osv:DEBIAN-CVE-2022-48950
linux
Fixed versions: 6.1.4-1
linux
Fixed versions: 6.1.4-1
linux
Fixed versions: 6.1.4-1
Complete source record
{
"id": "f9db00b1e1a30bc4377feb2293165c48bcd3073d1aa07ca785987f5baa477f28",
"url": "https://osv.dev/vulnerability/DEBIAN-CVE-2022-48950",
"method": "structured",
"payload": {
"kind": "advisory",
"title": "DEBIAN-CVE-2022-48950",
"summary": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf: Fix perf_pending_task() UaF Per syzbot it is possible for perf_pending_task() to run after the event is free()'d. There are two related but distinct cases: - the task_work was already queued before destroying the event; - destroying the event itself queues the task_work. The first cannot be solved using task_work_cancel() since perf_release() itself might be called from a task_work (____fput), which means the current->task_works list is already empty and task_work_cancel() won't be able to find the perf_pending_task() entry. The simplest alternative is extending the perf_event lifetime to cover the task_work. The second is just silly, queueing a task_work while you know the event is going away makes no sense and is easily avoided by re-arranging how the event is marked STATE_DEAD and ensuring it goes through STATE_OFF on the way down.",
"evidence": "osv:DEBIAN-CVE-2022-48950",
"products": [
{
"name": {
"value": "linux",
"evidence": "/affected/0/package/name"
},
"prerequisites": [],
"fixed_versions": [
{
"value": "6.1.4-1",
"evidence": "/affected/0/ranges"
}
],
"affected_versions": []
},
{
"name": {
"value": "linux",
"evidence": "/affected/1/package/name"
},
"prerequisites": [],
"fixed_versions": [
{
"value": "6.1.4-1",
"evidence": "/affected/1/ranges"
}
],
"affected_versions": []
},
{
"name": {
"value": "linux",
"evidence": "/affected/2/package/name"
},
"prerequisites": [],
"fixed_versions": [
{
"value": "6.1.4-1",
"evidence": "/affected/2/ranges"
}
],
"affected_versions": []
}
],
"severity": "high",
"structured": {
"id": "DEBIAN-CVE-2022-48950",
"aliases": [
"DEBIAN-CVE-2022-48950"
],
"metrics": [
{
"type": "CVSS_V3",
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H"
}
],
"affected": [
{
"ranges": [
{
"type": "ECOSYSTEM",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "6.1.4-1"
}
]
}
],
"package": {
"name": "linux",
"purl": "pkg:deb/debian/linux?arch=source&distro=bookworm",
"ecosystem": "Debian:12"
},
"database_specific": {
"source": "https://storage.googleapis.com/debian-osv/debian-cve-osv/DEBIAN-CVE-2022-48950.json"
},
"ecosystem_specific": {
"urgency": "not yet assigned"
}
},
{
"ranges": [
{
"type": "ECOSYSTEM",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "6.1.4-1"
}
]
}
],
"package": {
"name": "linux",
"purl": "pkg:deb/debian/linux?arch=source&distro=trixie",
"ecosystem": "Debian:13"
},
"database_specific": {
"source": "https://storage.googleapis.com/debian-osv/debian-cve-osv/DEBIAN-CVE-2022-48950.json"
},
"ecosystem_specific": {
"urgency": "not yet assigned"
}
},
{
"ranges": [
{
"type": "ECOSYSTEM",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "6.1.4-1"
}
]
}
],
"package": {
"name": "linux",
"purl": "pkg:deb/debian/linux?arch=source&distro=forky",
"ecosystem": "Debian:14"
},
"database_specific": {
"source": "https://storage.googleapis.com/debian-osv/debian-cve-osv/DEBIAN-CVE-2022-48950.json"
},
"ecosystem_specific": {
"urgency": "not yet assigned"
}
}
],
"modified": "2026-10-15T08:02:57.376603745Z",
"provider": "osv",
"upstream": [
"CVE-2022-48950"
],
"references": [
"https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2022-48950"
]
},
"related_cves": [
{
"value": "CVE-2022-48950",
"evidence": "/upstream"
}
],
"security_relevant": true,
"severity_evidence": "/severity/0/score"
},
"source_id": "core-osv",
"document_id": 324740,
"published_at": "2024-10-21T20:15:06.44+00:00"
}