CVE-2021-47618 : Detail

CVE-2021-47618

5.5
/
Medium
Memory Corruption
0.05%V4
Local
2024-06-20
10h57 +00:00
2025-05-04
07h15 +00:00
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

ARM: 9170/1: fix panic when kasan and kprobe are enabled

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ARM: 9170/1: fix panic when kasan and kprobe are enabled arm32 uses software to simulate the instruction replaced by kprobe. some instructions may be simulated by constructing assembly functions. therefore, before executing instruction simulation, it is necessary to construct assembly function execution environment in C language through binding registers. after kasan is enabled, the register binding relationship will be destroyed, resulting in instruction simulation errors and causing kernel panic. the kprobe emulate instruction function is distributed in three files: actions-common.c actions-arm.c actions-thumb.c, so disable KASAN when compiling these files. for example, use kprobe insert on cap_capable+20 after kasan enabled, the cap_capable assembly code is as follows: : e92d47f0 push {r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, sl, lr} e1a05000 mov r5, r0 e280006c add r0, r0, #108 ; 0x6c e1a04001 mov r4, r1 e1a06002 mov r6, r2 e59fa090 ldr sl, [pc, #144] ; ebfc7bf8 bl c03aa4b4 <__asan_load4> e595706c ldr r7, [r5, #108] ; 0x6c e2859014 add r9, r5, #20 ...... The emulate_ldr assembly code after enabling kasan is as follows: c06f1384 : e92d47f0 push {r4, r5, r6, r7, r8, r9, sl, lr} e282803c add r8, r2, #60 ; 0x3c e1a05000 mov r5, r0 e7e37855 ubfx r7, r5, #16, #4 e1a00008 mov r0, r8 e1a09001 mov r9, r1 e1a04002 mov r4, r2 ebf35462 bl c03c6530 <__asan_load4> e357000f cmp r7, #15 e7e36655 ubfx r6, r5, #12, #4 e205a00f and sl, r5, #15 0a000001 beq c06f13bc e0840107 add r0, r4, r7, lsl #2 ebf3545c bl c03c6530 <__asan_load4> e084010a add r0, r4, sl, lsl #2 ebf3545a bl c03c6530 <__asan_load4> e2890010 add r0, r9, #16 ebf35458 bl c03c6530 <__asan_load4> e5990010 ldr r0, [r9, #16] e12fff30 blx r0 e356000f cm r6, #15 1a000014 bne c06f1430 e1a06000 mov r6, r0 e2840040 add r0, r4, #64 ; 0x40 ...... when running in emulate_ldr to simulate the ldr instruction, panic occurred, and the log is as follows: Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000090 pgd = ecb46400 [00000090] *pgd=2e0fa003, *pmd=00000000 Internal error: Oops: 206 [#1] SMP ARM PC is at cap_capable+0x14/0xb0 LR is at emulate_ldr+0x50/0xc0 psr: 600d0293 sp : ecd63af8 ip : 00000004 fp : c0a7c30c r10: 00000000 r9 : c30897f4 r8 : ecd63cd4 r7 : 0000000f r6 : 0000000a r5 : e59fa090 r4 : ecd63c98 r3 : c06ae294 r2 : 00000000 r1 : b7611300 r0 : bf4ec008 Flags: nZCv IRQs off FIQs on Mode SVC_32 ISA ARM Segment user Control: 32c5387d Table: 2d546400 DAC: 55555555 Process bash (pid: 1643, stack limit = 0xecd60190) (cap_capable) from (kprobe_handler+0x218/0x340) (kprobe_handler) from (kprobe_trap_handler+0x24/0x48) (kprobe_trap_handler) from (do_undefinstr+0x13c/0x364) (do_undefinstr) from (__und_svc_finish+0x0/0x30) (__und_svc_finish) from (cap_capable+0x18/0xb0) (cap_capable) from (cap_vm_enough_memory+0x38/0x48) (cap_vm_enough_memory) from (security_vm_enough_memory_mm+0x48/0x6c) (security_vm_enough_memory_mm) from (copy_process.constprop.5+0x16b4/0x25c8) (copy_process.constprop.5) from (_do_fork+0xe8/0x55c) (_do_fork) from (SyS_clone+0x1c/0x24) (SyS_clone) from (__sys_trace_return+0x0/0x10) Code: 0050a0e1 6c0080e2 0140a0e1 0260a0e1 (f801f0e7)

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-476 NULL Pointer Dereference
The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.

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

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.

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 2.6.25 To (excluding) 5.15.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 5.16.5

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.17

References