CVE-2024-56586
CVE Descriptions
f2fs: fix f2fs_bug_on when uninstalling filesystem call f2fs_evict_inode.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: f2fs: fix f2fs_bug_on when uninstalling filesystem call f2fs_evict_inode. creating a large files during checkpoint disable until it runs out of space and then delete it, then remount to enable checkpoint again, and then unmount the filesystem triggers the f2fs_bug_on as below: ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/f2fs/inode.c:896! CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 1286 Comm: umount Not tainted 6.11.0-rc7-dirty #360 Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI RIP: 0010:f2fs_evict_inode+0x58c/0x610 Call Trace: __die_body+0x15/0x60 die+0x33/0x50 do_trap+0x10a/0x120 f2fs_evict_inode+0x58c/0x610 do_error_trap+0x60/0x80 f2fs_evict_inode+0x58c/0x610 exc_invalid_op+0x53/0x60 f2fs_evict_inode+0x58c/0x610 asm_exc_invalid_op+0x16/0x20 f2fs_evict_inode+0x58c/0x610 evict+0x101/0x260 dispose_list+0x30/0x50 evict_inodes+0x140/0x190 generic_shutdown_super+0x2f/0x150 kill_block_super+0x11/0x40 kill_f2fs_super+0x7d/0x140 deactivate_locked_super+0x2a/0x70 cleanup_mnt+0xb3/0x140 task_work_run+0x61/0x90 The root cause is: creating large files during disable checkpoint period results in not enough free segments, so when writing back root inode will failed in f2fs_enable_checkpoint. When umount the file system after enabling checkpoint, the root inode is dirty in f2fs_evict_inode function, which triggers BUG_ON. The steps to reproduce are as follows: dd if=/dev/zero of=f2fs.img bs=1M count=55 mount f2fs.img f2fs_dir -o checkpoint=disable:10% dd if=/dev/zero of=big bs=1M count=50 sync rm big mount -o remount,checkpoint=enable f2fs_dir umount f2fs_dir Let's redirty inode when there is not free segments during checkpoint is disable.CVE Informations
Related Weaknesses
| Weakness Name | Source | |
|---|---|---|
| No informations. |
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 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. 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 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) 3.8 To (excluding) 5.4.287
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.5 To (excluding) 5.10.231
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.174
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.1.120
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 To (excluding) 6.6.66
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.12.5
