CVE-2023-53679 : Détail

CVE-2023-53679

8.3
/
Haute
0.02%V4
Adjacent
2025-10-07
16h15 +00:00
2026-08-04
10h19 +00:00
Notifications pour un CVE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des notifications

Descriptions du CVE

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: wifi: mt7601u: fix an integer underflow Fix an integer underflow that leads to a null pointer dereference in 'mt7601u_rx_skb_from_seg()'. The variable 'dma_len' in the URB packet could be manipulated, which could trigger an integer underflow of 'seg_len' in 'mt7601u_rx_process_seg()'. This underflow subsequently causes the 'bad_frame' checks in 'mt7601u_rx_skb_from_seg()' to be bypassed, eventually leading to a dereference of the pointer 'p', which is a null pointer. Ensure that 'dma_len' is greater than 'min_seg_len'. Found by a modified version of syzkaller. KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000008-0x000000000000000f] CPU: 0 PID: 12 Comm: ksoftirqd/0 Tainted: G W O 5.14.0+ #139 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.12.1-0-ga5cab58e9a3f-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:skb_add_rx_frag+0x143/0x370 Code: e2 07 83 c2 03 38 ca 7c 08 84 c9 0f 85 86 01 00 00 4c 8d 7d 08 44 89 68 08 48 b8 00 00 00 00 00 fc ff df 4c 89 fa 48 c1 ea 03 <80> 3c 02 00 0f 85 cd 01 00 00 48 8b 45 08 a8 01 0f 85 3d 01 00 00 RSP: 0018:ffffc900000cfc90 EFLAGS: 00010202 RAX: dffffc0000000000 RBX: ffff888115520dc0 RCX: 0000000000000000 RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: ffff8881118430c0 RDI: ffff8881118430f8 RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000e09 R09: 0000000000000010 R10: ffff888111843017 R11: ffffed1022308602 R12: 0000000000000000 R13: 0000000000000e09 R14: 0000000000000010 R15: 0000000000000008 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88811a800000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 000000004035af40 CR3: 00000001157f2000 CR4: 0000000000750ef0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 PKRU: 55555554 Call Trace: mt7601u_rx_tasklet+0xc73/0x1270 ? mt7601u_submit_rx_buf.isra.0+0x510/0x510 ? tasklet_action_common.isra.0+0x79/0x2f0 tasklet_action_common.isra.0+0x206/0x2f0 __do_softirq+0x1b5/0x880 ? tasklet_unlock+0x30/0x30 run_ksoftirqd+0x26/0x50 smpboot_thread_fn+0x34f/0x7d0 ? smpboot_register_percpu_thread+0x370/0x370 kthread+0x3a1/0x480 ? set_kthread_struct+0x120/0x120 ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 Modules linked in: 88XXau(O) 88x2bu(O) ---[ end trace 57f34f93b4da0f9b ]--- RIP: 0010:skb_add_rx_frag+0x143/0x370 Code: e2 07 83 c2 03 38 ca 7c 08 84 c9 0f 85 86 01 00 00 4c 8d 7d 08 44 89 68 08 48 b8 00 00 00 00 00 fc ff df 4c 89 fa 48 c1 ea 03 <80> 3c 02 00 0f 85 cd 01 00 00 48 8b 45 08 a8 01 0f 85 3d 01 00 00 RSP: 0018:ffffc900000cfc90 EFLAGS: 00010202 RAX: dffffc0000000000 RBX: ffff888115520dc0 RCX: 0000000000000000 RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: ffff8881118430c0 RDI: ffff8881118430f8 RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000e09 R09: 0000000000000010 R10: ffff888111843017 R11: ffffed1022308602 R12: 0000000000000000 R13: 0000000000000e09 R14: 0000000000000010 R15: 0000000000000008 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88811a800000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 000000004035af40 CR3: 00000001157f2000 CR4: 0000000000750ef0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 PKRU: 55555554

Informations du CVE

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID Nom de la faiblesse Source
CWE-191 Integer Underflow (Wrap or Wraparound)
The product subtracts one value from another, such that the result is less than the minimum allowable integer value, which produces a value that is not equal to the correct result.

Métriques

Métriques Score Gravité CVSS Vecteur Source
V3.1 8.3 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/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.

Adjacent

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).

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.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

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.

Low

Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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
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.

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 4.2 To (excluding) 5.4.235

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.5 To (excluding) 5.10.173

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.99

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.1.16

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 To (excluding) 6.2.3

Références