In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
Bluetooth: btintel: serialize btintel_hw_error() with hci_req_sync_lock
btintel_hw_error() issues two __hci_cmd_sync() calls (HCI_OP_RESET and Intel exception-info retrieval) without holding hci_req_sync_lock(). This lets it race against hci_dev_do_close() -> btintel_shutdown_combined(), which also runs __hci_cmd_sync() under the same lock. When both paths manipulate hdev->req_status/req_rsp concurrently, the close path may free the response skb first, and the still-running hw_error path hits a slab-use-after-free in kfree_skb().
Wrap the whole recovery sequence in hci_req_sync_lock/unlock so it is serialized with every other synchronous HCI command issuer.
Below is the data race report and the kasan report:
BUG: data-race in __hci_cmd_sync_sk / btintel_shutdown_combined
read of hdev->req_rsp at net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:199 by task kworker/u17:1/83: __hci_cmd_sync_sk+0x12f2/0x1c30 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:200 __hci_cmd_sync+0x55/0x80 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:223 btintel_hw_error+0x114/0x670 drivers/bluetooth/btintel.c:254 hci_error_reset+0x348/0xa30 net/bluetooth/hci_core.c:1030
write/free by task ioctl/22580: btintel_shutdown_combined+0xd0/0x360 drivers/bluetooth/btintel.c:3648 hci_dev_close_sync+0x9ae/0x2c10 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:5246 hci_dev_do_close+0x232/0x460 net/bluetooth/hci_core.c:526
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in sk_skb_reason_drop+0x43/0x380 net/core/skbuff.c:1202 Read of size 4 at addr ffff888144a738dc by task kworker/u17:1/83: __hci_cmd_sync_sk+0x12f2/0x1c30 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:200 __hci_cmd_sync+0x55/0x80 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:223 btintel_hw_error+0x186/0x670 drivers/bluetooth/btintel.c:260
| Software | From | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| linux / linux_kernel | 4.3.1 | 6.6.131 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.7 | 6.12.80 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.13 | 6.18.21 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.19 | 6.19.11 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 4.3 | 4.3.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 7.0-rc1 | 7.0-rc1.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 7.0-rc2 | 7.0-rc2.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 7.0-rc3 | 7.0-rc3.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 7.0-rc4 | 7.0-rc4.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 7.0-rc5 | 7.0-rc5.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 7.0-rc6 | 7.0-rc6.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 7.0-rc7 | 7.0-rc7.x |
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.