CVE-2023-53216 — linux / linux_kernel
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
arm64: efi: Make efi_rt_lock a raw_spinlock
Running a rt-kernel base on 6.2.0-rc3-rt1 on an Ampere Altra outputs the following: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c:46 in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 9, name: kworker/u320:0 preempt_count: 2, expected: 0 RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0 3 locks held by kworker/u320:0/9: #0: ffff3fff8c27d128 ((wq_completion)efi_rts_wq){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work (./include/linux/atomic/atomic-long.h:41) #1: ffff80000861bdd0 ((work_completion)(&efi_rts_work.work)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work (./include/linux/atomic/atomic-long.h:41) #2: ffffdf7e1ed3e460 (efi_rt_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: efi_call_rts (drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c:101) Preemption disabled at: efi_virtmap_load (./arch/arm64/include/asm/mmu_context.h:248) CPU: 0 PID: 9 Comm: kworker/u320:0 Tainted: G W 6.2.0-rc3-rt1 Hardware name: WIWYNN Mt.Jade Server System B81.03001.0005/Mt.Jade Motherboard, BIOS 1.08.20220218 (SCP: 1.08.20220218) 2022/02/18 Workqueue: efi_rts_wq efi_call_rts Call trace: dump_backtrace (arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c:158) show_stack (arch/arm64/kernel/stacktrace.c:165) dump_stack_lvl (lib/dump_stack.c:107 (discriminator 4)) dump_stack (lib/dump_stack.c:114) __might_resched (kernel/sched/core.c:10134) rt_spin_lock (kernel/locking/rtmutex.c:1769 (discriminator 4)) efi_call_rts (drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c:101) [...]
This seems to come from commit ff7a167961d1 ("arm64: efi: Execute runtime services from a dedicated stack") which adds a spinlock. This spinlock is taken through: efi_call_rts() -efi_call_virt() -efi_call_virt_pointer() -arch_efi_call_virt_setup()
Make 'efi_rt_lock' a raw_spinlock to avoid being preempted.
[ardb: The EFI runtime services are called with a different set of translation tables, and are permitted to use the SIMD registers. The context switch code preserves/restores neither, and so EFI calls must be made with preemption disabled, rather than only disabling migration.]
| Software | From | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.10.165 | 5.10.175 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.15.90 | 5.15.103 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.1.8 | 6.1.18 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.2 | 6.2.5 |
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/030b1c4217a4f504c7d0795a2bd86b7181e56f11
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/0e68b5517d3767562889f1d83fdb828c26adb24f
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4e8f7d998b582a99aadedd07ae6086e99b89c97a
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/6a72729ed6accc86dad5522895e8fa2f96642a2c
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/8b38969fa01662ec539a0d08a8ea5ec6f31fa4ed
Deep Security Visibility Without the Complexity
SynScan provides clear, real-time security insights so you can monitor your attack surface, spot risks early, and act fast—without extra complexity.
- No setup fees
- 5-min deployment
- Cancel anytime
Frequently Asked Questions
A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.
CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.
A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.
Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.
Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.
SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.