In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
HID: appleir: fix UAF on pending key_up_timer in remove()
appleir_remove() runs hid_hw_stop() before timer_delete_sync(). hid_hw_stop() synchronously unregisters the HID input device via hid_disconnect() -> hidinput_disconnect() -> input_unregister_device(), which drops the last reference and frees the underlying input_dev when no userspace handle holds it open.
key_up_tick() reads appleir->input_dev and calls input_report_key() / input_sync() on it. The timer is armed from appleir_raw_event() with a HZ/8 (~125 ms) timeout on every keydown and key-repeat report. If a key was pressed shortly before the device is disconnected, the timer can fire after hid_hw_stop() has freed input_dev but before the teardown drains it.
A simple reorder is not sufficient. Putting the timer drain first still leaves a window where a USB URB completion (raw_event) running during hid_hw_stop() can call mod_timer() and re-arm the timer, which then fires after hidinput_disconnect() has freed input_dev. The same URB-completion window also lets raw_event() reach key_up(), key_down() and battery_flat() directly, all of which dereference appleir->input_dev.
Introduce a 'removing' flag on struct appleir, gated by the existing spinlock. appleir_remove() sets the flag under the lock and then shuts down the timer with timer_shutdown_sync(), which both drains any in-flight callback and permanently disables further mod_timer() calls. appleir_raw_event() and key_up_tick() bail out early if the flag is set, so no path can arm or run the timer, or dereference appleir->input_dev, after remove() has started tearing down.
The keyrepeat and flatbattery branches of appleir_raw_event() previously called into the input layer without holding the spinlock; take it now so the flag check is well-defined. This incidentally closes a pre-existing read-side race on appleir->current_key in the keyrepeat branch.
This bug is structurally a sibling of commit 4db2af929279 ("HID: appletb-kbd: fix UAF in inactivity-timer cleanup path") and has been present since the driver was introduced.
| Software | Affected versions |
|---|---|
| linux / linux_kernel | >= 3.10, < 5.10.261 |
| linux / linux_kernel | >= 5.11, < 5.15.212 |
| linux / linux_kernel | >= 5.16, < 6.1.178 |
| linux / linux_kernel | >= 6.2, < 6.6.145 |
| linux / linux_kernel | >= 6.7, < 6.12.97 |
| linux / linux_kernel | >= 6.13, < 6.18.39 |
| linux / linux_kernel | >= 6.19, < 7.1.4 |
| linux / linux_kernel | = 7.2-rc1 |
| linux / linux_kernel | = 7.2-rc2 |
A vulnerability database tells you what is broken. Attack surface management tells you where it is running: it discovers your internet-facing assets and flags the ones affected by issues like this one.
What is attack surface management? →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.