CVE-2022-49880 : Détail

CVE-2022-49880

5.5
/
Moyen
0.02%V4
Local
2025-05-01
14h10 +00:00
2025-05-04
08h47 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications pour un CVE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des notifications

Descriptions du CVE

ext4: fix warning in 'ext4_da_release_space'

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: fix warning in 'ext4_da_release_space' Syzkaller report issue as follows: EXT4-fs (loop0): Free/Dirty block details EXT4-fs (loop0): free_blocks=0 EXT4-fs (loop0): dirty_blocks=0 EXT4-fs (loop0): Block reservation details EXT4-fs (loop0): i_reserved_data_blocks=0 EXT4-fs warning (device loop0): ext4_da_release_space:1527: ext4_da_release_space: ino 18, to_free 1 with only 0 reserved data blocks ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 92 at fs/ext4/inode.c:1528 ext4_da_release_space+0x25e/0x370 fs/ext4/inode.c:1524 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 PID: 92 Comm: kworker/u4:4 Not tainted 6.0.0-syzkaller-09423-g493ffd6605b2 #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 09/22/2022 Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn (flush-7:0) RIP: 0010:ext4_da_release_space+0x25e/0x370 fs/ext4/inode.c:1528 RSP: 0018:ffffc900015f6c90 EFLAGS: 00010296 RAX: 42215896cd52ea00 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 42215896cd52ea00 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000080000001 RDI: 0000000000000000 RBP: 1ffff1100e907d96 R08: ffffffff816aa79d R09: fffff520002bece5 R10: fffff520002bece5 R11: 1ffff920002bece4 R12: ffff888021fd2000 R13: ffff88807483ecb0 R14: 0000000000000001 R15: ffff88807483e740 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8880b9a00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00005555569ba628 CR3: 000000000c88e000 CR4: 00000000003506f0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 Call Trace: ext4_es_remove_extent+0x1ab/0x260 fs/ext4/extents_status.c:1461 mpage_release_unused_pages+0x24d/0xef0 fs/ext4/inode.c:1589 ext4_writepages+0x12eb/0x3be0 fs/ext4/inode.c:2852 do_writepages+0x3c3/0x680 mm/page-writeback.c:2469 __writeback_single_inode+0xd1/0x670 fs/fs-writeback.c:1587 writeback_sb_inodes+0xb3b/0x18f0 fs/fs-writeback.c:1870 wb_writeback+0x41f/0x7b0 fs/fs-writeback.c:2044 wb_do_writeback fs/fs-writeback.c:2187 [inline] wb_workfn+0x3cb/0xef0 fs/fs-writeback.c:2227 process_one_work+0x877/0xdb0 kernel/workqueue.c:2289 worker_thread+0xb14/0x1330 kernel/workqueue.c:2436 kthread+0x266/0x300 kernel/kthread.c:376 ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:306 Above issue may happens as follows: ext4_da_write_begin ext4_create_inline_data ext4_clear_inode_flag(inode, EXT4_INODE_EXTENTS); ext4_set_inode_flag(inode, EXT4_INODE_INLINE_DATA); __ext4_ioctl ext4_ext_migrate -> will lead to eh->eh_entries not zero, and set extent flag ext4_da_write_begin ext4_da_convert_inline_data_to_extent ext4_da_write_inline_data_begin ext4_da_map_blocks ext4_insert_delayed_block if (!ext4_es_scan_clu(inode, &ext4_es_is_delonly, lblk)) if (!ext4_es_scan_clu(inode, &ext4_es_is_mapped, lblk)) ext4_clu_mapped(inode, EXT4_B2C(sbi, lblk)); -> will return 1 allocated = true; ext4_es_insert_delayed_block(inode, lblk, allocated); ext4_writepages mpage_map_and_submit_extent(handle, &mpd, &give_up_on_write); -> return -ENOSPC mpage_release_unused_pages(&mpd, give_up_on_write); -> give_up_on_write == 1 ext4_es_remove_extent ext4_da_release_space(inode, reserved); if (unlikely(to_free > ei->i_reserved_data_blocks)) -> to_free == 1 but ei->i_reserved_data_blocks == 0 -> then trigger warning as above To solve above issue, forbid inode do migrate which has inline data.

Informations du CVE

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID Nom de la faiblesse Source
CWE Other 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

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 est un modèle de notation qui prédit la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée.

Score EPSS

Le modèle EPSS produit un score de probabilité compris entre 0 et 1 (0 et 100 %). Plus la note est élevée, plus la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée est grande.

Percentile EPSS

Le percentile est utilisé pour classer les CVE en fonction de leur score EPSS. Par exemple, une CVE dans le 95e percentile selon son score EPSS est plus susceptible d'être exploitée que 95 % des autres CVE. Ainsi, le percentile sert à comparer le score EPSS d'une CVE par rapport à d'autres CVE.
EPSS First.org

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version To (excluding) 4.9.333

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 4.10 To (excluding) 4.14.299

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 4.15 To (excluding) 4.19.265

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 4.20 To (excluding) 5.4.224

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.5 To (excluding) 5.10.154

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.78

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.0.8

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.1

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.1

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.1

Références

Les informations affichées sur CVE Find proviennent de plusieurs sources de référence rigoureusement sélectionnées. Les données CVE sont fournies par MITRE Corporation et la National Vulnerability Database (NVD). Le catalogue des vulnérabilités activement exploitées (KEV) provient de la Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), tandis que les scores EPSS sont issus de FIRST.org. Enfin, les données relatives aux faiblesses logicielles (CWE) et aux schémas d'attaque courants (CAPEC) sont maintenues par MITRE Corporation, et les informations sur les configurations logicielles et matérielles (CPE) proviennent du NVD.