CVE-2022-49513
Descriptions du CVE
cpufreq: governor: Use kobject release() method to free dbs_data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: cpufreq: governor: Use kobject release() method to free dbs_data The struct dbs_data embeds a struct gov_attr_set and the struct gov_attr_set embeds a kobject. Since every kobject must have a release() method and we can't use kfree() to free it directly, so introduce cpufreq_dbs_data_release() to release the dbs_data via the kobject::release() method. This fixes the calltrace like below: ODEBUG: free active (active state 0) object type: timer_list hint: delayed_work_timer_fn+0x0/0x34 WARNING: CPU: 12 PID: 810 at lib/debugobjects.c:505 debug_print_object+0xb8/0x100 Modules linked in: CPU: 12 PID: 810 Comm: sh Not tainted 5.16.0-next-20220120-yocto-standard+ #536 Hardware name: Marvell OcteonTX CN96XX board (DT) pstate: 60400009 (nZCv daif +PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) pc : debug_print_object+0xb8/0x100 lr : debug_print_object+0xb8/0x100 sp : ffff80001dfcf9a0 x29: ffff80001dfcf9a0 x28: 0000000000000001 x27: ffff0001464f0000 x26: 0000000000000000 x25: ffff8000090e3f00 x24: ffff80000af60210 x23: ffff8000094dfb78 x22: ffff8000090e3f00 x21: ffff0001080b7118 x20: ffff80000aeb2430 x19: ffff800009e8f5e0 x18: 0000000000000000 x17: 0000000000000002 x16: 00004d62e58be040 x15: 013590470523aff8 x14: ffff8000090e1828 x13: 0000000001359047 x12: 00000000f5257d14 x11: 0000000000040591 x10: 0000000066c1ffea x9 : ffff8000080d15e0 x8 : ffff80000a1765a8 x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : 0000000000000001 x5 : ffff800009e8c000 x4 : ffff800009e8c760 x3 : 0000000000000000 x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : 0000000000000000 x0 : ffff0001474ed040 Call trace: debug_print_object+0xb8/0x100 __debug_check_no_obj_freed+0x1d0/0x25c debug_check_no_obj_freed+0x24/0xa0 kfree+0x11c/0x440 cpufreq_dbs_governor_exit+0xa8/0xac cpufreq_exit_governor+0x44/0x90 cpufreq_set_policy+0x29c/0x570 store_scaling_governor+0x110/0x154 store+0xb0/0xe0 sysfs_kf_write+0x58/0x84 kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x12c/0x1c0 new_sync_write+0xf0/0x18c vfs_write+0x1cc/0x220 ksys_write+0x74/0x100 __arm64_sys_write+0x28/0x3c invoke_syscall.constprop.0+0x58/0xf0 do_el0_svc+0x70/0x170 el0_svc+0x54/0x190 el0t_64_sync_handler+0xa4/0x130 el0t_64_sync+0x1a0/0x1a4 irq event stamp: 189006 hardirqs last enabled at (189005): [Informations du CVE
Faiblesses connexes
| Nom de la faiblesse | Source | |
|---|---|---|
| No informations. |
Métriques
| Métriques | Score | Gravité | CVSS Vecteur | 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
Score EPSS
Percentile EPSS
Products Mentioned
Configuraton 0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 4.6 To (excluding) 5.15.91
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 5.18.3
