CVE-2025-39948
Descriptions du CVE
ice: fix Rx page leak on multi-buffer frames
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ice: fix Rx page leak on multi-buffer frames The ice_put_rx_mbuf() function handles calling ice_put_rx_buf() for each buffer in the current frame. This function was introduced as part of handling multi-buffer XDP support in the ice driver. It works by iterating over the buffers from first_desc up to 1 plus the total number of fragments in the frame, cached from before the XDP program was executed. If the hardware posts a descriptor with a size of 0, the logic used in ice_put_rx_mbuf() breaks. Such descriptors get skipped and don't get added as fragments in ice_add_xdp_frag. Since the buffer isn't counted as a fragment, we do not iterate over it in ice_put_rx_mbuf(), and thus we don't call ice_put_rx_buf(). Because we don't call ice_put_rx_buf(), we don't attempt to re-use the page or free it. This leaves a stale page in the ring, as we don't increment next_to_alloc. The ice_reuse_rx_page() assumes that the next_to_alloc has been incremented properly, and that it always points to a buffer with a NULL page. Since this function doesn't check, it will happily recycle a page over the top of the next_to_alloc buffer, losing track of the old page. Note that this leak only occurs for multi-buffer frames. The ice_put_rx_mbuf() function always handles at least one buffer, so a single-buffer frame will always get handled correctly. It is not clear precisely why the hardware hands us descriptors with a size of 0 sometimes, but it happens somewhat regularly with "jumbo frames" used by 9K MTU. To fix ice_put_rx_mbuf(), we need to make sure to call ice_put_rx_buf() on all buffers between first_desc and next_to_clean. Borrow the logic of a similar function in i40e used for this same purpose. Use the same logic also in ice_get_pgcnts(). Instead of iterating over just the number of fragments, use a loop which iterates until the current index reaches to the next_to_clean element just past the current frame. Unlike i40e, the ice_put_rx_mbuf() function does call ice_put_rx_buf() on the last buffer of the frame indicating the end of packet. For non-linear (multi-buffer) frames, we need to take care when adjusting the pagecnt_bias. An XDP program might release fragments from the tail of the frame, in which case that fragment page is already released. Only update the pagecnt_bias for the first descriptor and fragments still remaining post-XDP program. Take care to only access the shared info for fragmented buffers, as this avoids a significant cache miss. The xdp_xmit value only needs to be updated if an XDP program is run, and only once per packet. Drop the xdp_xmit pointer argument from ice_put_rx_mbuf(). Instead, set xdp_xmit in the ice_clean_rx_irq() function directly. This avoids needing to pass the argument and avoids an extra bit-wise OR for each buffer in the frame. Move the increment of the ntc local variable to ensure its updated *before* all calls to ice_get_pgcnts() or ice_put_rx_mbuf(), as the loop logic requires the index of the element just after the current frame. Now that we use an index pointer in the ring to identify the packet, we no longer need to track or cache the number of fragments in the rx_ring.Informations du CVE
Faiblesses connexes
| Nom de la faiblesse | Source | |
|---|---|---|
| Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime The product does not sufficiently track and release allocated memory after it has been used, making the memory unavailable for reallocation and reuse. |
Métriques
| Métriques | Score | Gravité | CVSS Vecteur | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 9.8 | CRITICAL |
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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. Network The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers). 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 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. 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 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. |
|
| 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) 6.6.78 To (excluding) 6.7
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.12.14 To (excluding) 6.12.49
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.13.3 To (excluding) 6.14
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.14.1 To (excluding) 6.16.9
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.14
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.14
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.14
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.14
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.14
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.14
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.14
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.17
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.17
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.17
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.17
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.17
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.17
