CVE-2024-38613
CVE Descriptions
m68k: Fix spinlock race in kernel thread creation
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: m68k: Fix spinlock race in kernel thread creation Context switching does take care to retain the correct lock owner across the switch from 'prev' to 'next' tasks. This does rely on interrupts remaining disabled for the entire duration of the switch. This condition is guaranteed for normal process creation and context switching between already running processes, because both 'prev' and 'next' already have interrupts disabled in their saved copies of the status register. The situation is different for newly created kernel threads. The status register is set to PS_S in copy_thread(), which does leave the IPL at 0. Upon restoring the 'next' thread's status register in switch_to() aka resume(), interrupts then become enabled prematurely. resume() then returns via ret_from_kernel_thread() and schedule_tail() where run queue lock is released (see finish_task_switch() and finish_lock_switch()). A timer interrupt calling scheduler_tick() before the lock is released in finish_task_switch() will find the lock already taken, with the current task as lock owner. This causes a spinlock recursion warning as reported by Guenter Roeck. As far as I can ascertain, this race has been opened in commit 533e6903bea0 ("m68k: split ret_from_fork(), simplify kernel_thread()") but I haven't done a detailed study of kernel history so it may well predate that commit. Interrupts cannot be disabled in the saved status register copy for kernel threads (init will complain about interrupts disabled when finally starting user space). Disable interrupts temporarily when switching the tasks' register sets in resume(). Note that a simple oriw 0x700,%sr after restoring sr is not enough here - this leaves enough of a race for the 'spinlock recursion' warning to still be observed. Tested on ARAnyM and qemu (Quadra 800 emulation).CVE Informations
Related Weaknesses
| Weakness Name | Source | |
|---|---|---|
| Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition') The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently. |
Metrics
| Metrics | Score | Severity | CVSS Vector | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 4.7 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
More informations
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe 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. High successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThese 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 Score
EPSS Percentile
Products Mentioned
Configuraton 0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 3.7 To (excluding) 4.19.316
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 4.20 To (excluding) 5.4.278
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.5 To (excluding) 5.10.219
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.161
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.1.93
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 To (excluding) 6.6.33
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.8.12
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.9 To (excluding) 6.9.3
