CVE Descriptions

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/virtio: use uninterruptible resv lock for plane updates virtio_gpu_cursor_plane_update() and virtio_gpu_resource_flush() lock the framebuffer BO's dma_resv via virtio_gpu_array_lock_resv() and ignore its return value. The function can fail with -EINTR from dma_resv_lock_interruptible() (signal during lock wait) or with -ENOMEM from dma_resv_reserve_fences() (fence slot allocation), leaving the resv lock not held. The queue path then walks the object array and calls dma_resv_add_fence(), which requires the lock held; with lockdep enabled this trips dma_resv_assert_held(): WARNING: drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c:296 at dma_resv_add_fence+0x71e/0x840 Call Trace: virtio_gpu_array_add_fence virtio_gpu_queue_ctrl_sgs virtio_gpu_queue_fenced_ctrl_buffer virtio_gpu_cursor_plane_update drm_atomic_helper_commit_planes drm_atomic_helper_commit_tail commit_tail drm_atomic_helper_commit drm_atomic_commit drm_atomic_helper_update_plane __setplane_atomic drm_mode_cursor_universal drm_mode_cursor_common drm_mode_cursor_ioctl drm_ioctl __x64_sys_ioctl Beyond the WARN, mutating the dma_resv fence list without the lock races with concurrent readers/writers and can corrupt the list. Both call sites run inside the .atomic_update plane callback, which DRM atomic helpers do not allow to fail (by the time it runs, the commit has been signed off to userspace and there is no clean rollback path). Moving the lock acquisition to .prepare_fb was rejected because the broader lock scope deadlocks against other BO locking paths in the same atomic commit. Introduce virtio_gpu_lock_one_resv_uninterruptible() that uses dma_resv_lock() instead of dma_resv_lock_interruptible(). This eliminates the -EINTR failure mode -- the realistic syzbot trigger -- without extending the lock hold across the commit. The helper locks a single BO and rejects nents > 1 with -EINVAL; both fix sites lock exactly one BO. Use it from virtio_gpu_cursor_plane_update() and virtio_gpu_resource_flush(); check the return value to handle the remaining -ENOMEM case from dma_resv_reserve_fences() by freeing the objs and skipping the plane update for that frame. The framebuffer BOs touched here are not shared with other contexts and lock contention is expected to be brief, so the loss of signal-interruptibility is acceptable. Other callers of virtio_gpu_array_lock_resv() (the ioctl paths) continue to use the interruptible variant. The bug was reported by syzbot, triggered via fault injection (fail_nth) on the DRM_IOCTL_MODE_CURSOR path, which forces the -ENOMEM branch in dma_resv_reserve_fences().

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID	Weakness Name	Source
CWE-667	Improper Locking The product does not properly acquire or release a lock on a resource, leading to unexpected resource state changes and behaviors.

Metrics

Metrics	Score	Severity	CVSS Vector	Source
V3.1	7.8	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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. High There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. High There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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.	416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67