In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
crypto: qat - protect service table iterations with service_lock
The service_table list is protected by service_lock when entries are
added or removed (in adf_service_add() and adf_service_remove()), but
several functions iterate over the list without holding this lock.
A concurrent adf_service_register() or adf_service_unregister() call
could modify the list during traversal, leading to list corruption or
a use-after-free.
Fix this by holding service_lock across all list_for_each_entry()
iterations of service_table in adf_dev_init(), adf_dev_start(),
adf_dev_stop(), adf_dev_shutdown(), adf_dev_restarting_notify(),
adf_dev_restarted_notify(), and adf_error_notifier().
The lock ordering is safe: callers of the static helpers (adf_dev_up()
and adf_dev_down()) acquire state_lock before service_lock, and no
event_hld callback or service_lock holder ever acquires state_lock in
the reverse order.
crypto: qat - protect service table iterations with service_lock
The service_table list is protected by service_lock when entries are
added or removed (in adf_service_add() and adf_service_remove()), but
several functions iterate over the list without holding this lock.
A concurrent adf_service_register() or adf_service_unregister() call
could modify the list during traversal, leading to list corruption or
a use-after-free.
Fix this by holding service_lock across all list_for_each_entry()
iterations of service_table in adf_dev_init(), adf_dev_start(),
adf_dev_stop(), adf_dev_shutdown(), adf_dev_restarting_notify(),
adf_dev_restarted_notify(), and adf_error_notifier().
The lock ordering is safe: callers of the static helpers (adf_dev_up()
and adf_dev_down()) acquire state_lock before service_lock, and no
event_hld callback or service_lock holder ever acquires state_lock in
the reverse order.
Metrics
Affected Vendors & Products
Advisories
| Source | ID | Title |
|---|---|---|
Debian DLA |
DLA-4724-1 | linux-6.12 new package |
Fixes
Solution
No solution given by the vendor.
Workaround
No workaround given by the vendor.
References
History
Mon, 03 Aug 2026 19:45:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Weaknesses | CWE-362 CWE-416 |
Thu, 30 Jul 2026 00:15:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Weaknesses | CWE-366 | |
| References |
| |
| Metrics |
threat_severity
|
cvssV3_1
|
Sun, 26 Jul 2026 02:45:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Weaknesses | CWE-362 CWE-416 |
Sat, 25 Jul 2026 09:30:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Description | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: crypto: qat - protect service table iterations with service_lock The service_table list is protected by service_lock when entries are added or removed (in adf_service_add() and adf_service_remove()), but several functions iterate over the list without holding this lock. A concurrent adf_service_register() or adf_service_unregister() call could modify the list during traversal, leading to list corruption or a use-after-free. Fix this by holding service_lock across all list_for_each_entry() iterations of service_table in adf_dev_init(), adf_dev_start(), adf_dev_stop(), adf_dev_shutdown(), adf_dev_restarting_notify(), adf_dev_restarted_notify(), and adf_error_notifier(). The lock ordering is safe: callers of the static helpers (adf_dev_up() and adf_dev_down()) acquire state_lock before service_lock, and no event_hld callback or service_lock holder ever acquires state_lock in the reverse order. | |
| Title | crypto: qat - protect service table iterations with service_lock | |
| First Time appeared |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| CPEs | cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* | |
| Vendors & Products |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| References |
|
Projects
Sign in to view the affected projects.
Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published:
Updated: 2026-08-17T04:53:04.376Z
Reserved: 2026-07-19T15:36:31.779Z
Link: CVE-2026-64305
No data.
Status : Awaiting Analysis
Published: 2026-07-25T10:17:11.530
Modified: 2026-08-17T05:17:30.550
Link: CVE-2026-64305
OpenCVE Enrichment
Updated: 2026-08-04T15:00:13Z
Weaknesses
Debian DLA