CVE Descriptions

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/v3d: Set DMA segment size to avoid debug warnings When using V3D rendering with CONFIG_DMA_API_DEBUG enabled, the kernel occasionally reports a segment size mismatch. This is because 'max_seg_size' is not set. The kernel defaults to 64K. setting 'max_seg_size' to the maximum will prevent 'debug_dma_map_sg()' from complaining about the over-mapping of the V3D segment length. DMA-API: v3d 1002000000.v3d: mapping sg segment longer than device claims to support [len=8290304] [max=65536] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 493 at kernel/dma/debug.c:1179 debug_dma_map_sg+0x330/0x388 CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 493 Comm: Xorg Not tainted 6.12.53-yocto-standard #1 Hardware name: Raspberry Pi 5 Model B Rev 1.0 (DT) pstate: 60400009 (nZCv daif +PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) pc : debug_dma_map_sg+0x330/0x388 lr : debug_dma_map_sg+0x330/0x388 sp : ffff8000829a3ac0 x29: ffff8000829a3ac0 x28: 0000000000000001 x27: ffff8000813fe000 x26: ffffc1ffc0000000 x25: ffff00010fdeb760 x24: 0000000000000000 x23: ffff8000816a9bf0 x22: 0000000000000001 x21: 0000000000000002 x20: 0000000000000002 x19: ffff00010185e810 x18: ffffffffffffffff x17: 69766564206e6168 x16: 74207265676e6f6c x15: 20746e656d676573 x14: 20677320676e6970 x13: 5d34303334393134 x12: 0000000000000000 x11: 00000000000000c0 x10: 00000000000009c0 x9 : ffff8000800e0b7c x8 : ffff00010a315ca0 x7 : ffff8000816a5110 x6 : 0000000000000001 x5 : 000000000000002b x4 : 0000000000000002 x3 : 0000000000000008 x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : 0000000000000000 x0 : ffff00010a315280 Call trace: debug_dma_map_sg+0x330/0x388 __dma_map_sg_attrs+0xc0/0x278 dma_map_sgtable+0x30/0x58 drm_gem_shmem_get_pages_sgt+0xb4/0x140 v3d_bo_create_finish+0x28/0x130 [v3d] v3d_create_bo_ioctl+0x54/0x180 [v3d] drm_ioctl_kernel+0xc8/0x140 drm_ioctl+0x2d4/0x4d8

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID	Weakness Name	Source
CWE-131	Incorrect Calculation of Buffer Size The product does not correctly calculate the size to be used when allocating a buffer, which could lead to a buffer overflow.

Metrics

Metrics	Score	Severity	CVSS Vector	Source
V3.1	5.5	MEDIUM	CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H More informations Base: Exploitabilty Metrics The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component. Attack Vector This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. Local The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Attack Complexity This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. Low Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. Low The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources. User Interaction This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component. None The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user. Base: Scope Metrics The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope. Scope Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs. Unchanged An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority. Base: Impact Metrics The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve. Confidentiality Impact This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. None There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. High There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable). Temporal Metrics The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability. Environmental Metrics These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.	nvd@nist.gov

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.

EPSS First.org