CVE-2021-47635
Descriptions du CVE
ubifs: Fix to add refcount once page is set private
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ubifs: Fix to add refcount once page is set private MM defined the rule [1] very clearly that once page was set with PG_private flag, we should increment the refcount in that page, also main flows like pageout(), migrate_page() will assume there is one additional page reference count if page_has_private() returns true. Otherwise, we may get a BUG in page migration: page:0000000080d05b9d refcount:-1 mapcount:0 mapping:000000005f4d82a8 index:0xe2 pfn:0x14c12 aops:ubifs_file_address_operations [ubifs] ino:8f1 dentry name:"f30e" flags: 0x1fffff80002405(locked|uptodate|owner_priv_1|private|node=0| zone=1|lastcpupid=0x1fffff) page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(page_count(page) != 0) ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at include/linux/page_ref.h:184! invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP CPU: 3 PID: 38 Comm: kcompactd0 Not tainted 5.15.0-rc5 RIP: 0010:migrate_page_move_mapping+0xac3/0xe70 Call Trace: ubifs_migrate_page+0x22/0xc0 [ubifs] move_to_new_page+0xb4/0x600 migrate_pages+0x1523/0x1cc0 compact_zone+0x8c5/0x14b0 kcompactd+0x2bc/0x560 kthread+0x18c/0x1e0 ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 Before the time, we should make clean a concept, what does refcount means in page gotten from grab_cache_page_write_begin(). There are 2 situations: Situation 1: refcount is 3, page is created by __page_cache_alloc. TYPE_A - the write process is using this page TYPE_B - page is assigned to one certain mapping by calling __add_to_page_cache_locked() TYPE_C - page is added into pagevec list corresponding current cpu by calling lru_cache_add() Situation 2: refcount is 2, page is gotten from the mapping's tree TYPE_B - page has been assigned to one certain mapping TYPE_A - the write process is using this page (by calling page_cache_get_speculative()) Filesystem releases one refcount by calling put_page() in xxx_write_end(), the released refcount corresponds to TYPE_A (write task is using it). If there are any processes using a page, page migration process will skip the page by judging whether expected_page_refs() equals to page refcount. The BUG is caused by following process: PA(cpu 0) kcompactd(cpu 1) compact_zone ubifs_write_begin page_a = grab_cache_page_write_begin add_to_page_cache_lru lru_cache_add pagevec_add // put page into cpu 0's pagevec (refcnf = 3, for page creation process) ubifs_write_end SetPagePrivate(page_a) // doesn't increase page count ! unlock_page(page_a) put_page(page_a) // refcnt = 2 [...] PB(cpu 0) filemap_read filemap_get_pages add_to_page_cache_lru lru_cache_add __pagevec_lru_add // traverse all pages in cpu 0's pagevec __pagevec_lru_add_fn SetPageLRU(page_a) isolate_migratepages isolate_migratepages_block get_page_unless_zero(page_a) // refcnt = 3 list_add(page_a, from_list) migrate_pages(from_list) __unmap_and_move move_to_new_page ubifs_migrate_page(page_a) migrate_page_move_mapping expected_page_refs get 3 (migration[1] + mapping[1] + private[1]) release_pages put_page_testzero(page_a) // refcnt = 3 page_ref_freeze // refcnt = 0 page_ref_dec_and_test(0 - 1 = -1) page_ref_unfreeze VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(-1 != 0, page) UBIFS doesn't increase the page refcount after setting private flag, which leads to page migration task believes the page is not used by any other processes, so the page is migrated. This causes concurrent accessing on page refcount between put_page() called by other process(eg. read process calls lru_cache_add) and page_ref_unfreeze() called by mi ---truncated---Informations du CVE
Métriques
| Métriques | Score | Gravité | CVSS Vecteur | 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 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. 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) 2.6.27 To (excluding) 5.10.110
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.33
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 5.16.19
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.17 To (excluding) 5.17.2
