CVE 7.8 HIGH

ALSA: timer: Forcibly close timer instances at closing_CVE-2026-53193

7.8 / 10
HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Description

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

ALSA: timer: Forcibly close timer instances at closing

When snd_timer object is freed via snd_timer_free() and still pending
snd_timer_instance objects are assigned to the timer object, it tries
to unlink all instances and just set NULL to each ti->timer, then
releases the resources immediately. The problem is, however, when
there are slave timer instances that are associated with a master
instance linked to this timer: namely, those slave instances still
point to the freed timer object although the master instance is
unlinked, which may lead to user-after-free. The bug can be easily
triggered particularly when a new userspace-driven timers
(CONFIG_SND_UTIMER) is involved, since it can create and delete the
timer object via a simple file open/close, while the other
applications may keep accessing to that timer.

This patch is an attempt to paper over the problem above: now instead
of just unlinking, call snd_timer_close[_locked]() forcibly for each
pending timer instance, so that all assigned slave timer instances are
properly detached, too. Since snd_timer_close() might be called later
by the driver that created that instance, the check of
SNDRV_TIMER_IFLG_DEAD is added at the beginning, too.

Basic Information

ID CVE-2026-53193
Source Linux
Published Jun 25, 2026 at 08:39
Modified Jun 28, 2026 at 06:40

Affected Product

Vendor Linux
Product Linux
Version 37745918e0e7575bc40f38da93a99b9fa6406224
Affected Versions Linux Linux 37745918e0e7575bc40f38da93a99b9fa6406224
Linux Linux 37745918e0e7575bc40f38da93a99b9fa6406224
Linux Linux 37745918e0e7575bc40f38da93a99b9fa6406224
Linux Linux 37745918e0e7575bc40f38da93a99b9fa6406224
Linux Linux 6.12

References

💭 Join the Security Discussion

🔒 Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

⚠️ Please be respectful and constructive in your comments. Security discussions should remain professional.