CVE-2022-50341
Descriptions du CVE
cifs: fix oops during encryption
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: cifs: fix oops during encryption When running xfstests against Azure the following oops occurred on an arm64 system Unable to handle kernel write to read-only memory at virtual address ffff0001221cf000 Mem abort info: ESR = 0x9600004f EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits SET = 0, FnV = 0 EA = 0, S1PTW = 0 FSC = 0x0f: level 3 permission fault Data abort info: ISV = 0, ISS = 0x0000004f CM = 0, WnR = 1 swapper pgtable: 4k pages, 48-bit VAs, pgdp=00000000294f3000 [ffff0001221cf000] pgd=18000001ffff8003, p4d=18000001ffff8003, pud=18000001ff82e003, pmd=18000001ff71d003, pte=00600001221cf787 Internal error: Oops: 9600004f [#1] PREEMPT SMP ... pstate: 80000005 (Nzcv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO BTYPE=--) pc : __memcpy+0x40/0x230 lr : scatterwalk_copychunks+0xe0/0x200 sp : ffff800014e92de0 x29: ffff800014e92de0 x28: ffff000114f9de80 x27: 0000000000000008 x26: 0000000000000008 x25: ffff800014e92e78 x24: 0000000000000008 x23: 0000000000000001 x22: 0000040000000000 x21: ffff000000000000 x20: 0000000000000001 x19: ffff0001037c4488 x18: 0000000000000014 x17: 235e1c0d6efa9661 x16: a435f9576b6edd6c x15: 0000000000000058 x14: 0000000000000001 x13: 0000000000000008 x12: ffff000114f2e590 x11: ffffffffffffffff x10: 0000040000000000 x9 : ffff8000105c3580 x8 : 2e9413b10000001a x7 : 534b4410fb86b005 x6 : 534b4410fb86b005 x5 : ffff0001221cf008 x4 : ffff0001037c4490 x3 : 0000000000000001 x2 : 0000000000000008 x1 : ffff0001037c4488 x0 : ffff0001221cf000 Call trace: __memcpy+0x40/0x230 scatterwalk_map_and_copy+0x98/0x100 crypto_ccm_encrypt+0x150/0x180 crypto_aead_encrypt+0x2c/0x40 crypt_message+0x750/0x880 smb3_init_transform_rq+0x298/0x340 smb_send_rqst.part.11+0xd8/0x180 smb_send_rqst+0x3c/0x100 compound_send_recv+0x534/0xbc0 smb2_query_info_compound+0x32c/0x440 smb2_set_ea+0x438/0x4c0 cifs_xattr_set+0x5d4/0x7c0 This is because in scatterwalk_copychunks(), we attempted to write to a buffer (@sign) that was allocated in the stack (vmalloc area) by crypt_message() and thus accessing its remaining 8 (x2) bytes ended up crossing a page boundary. To simply fix it, we could just pass @sign kmalloc'd from crypt_message() and then we're done. Luckily, we don't seem to pass any other vmalloc'd buffers in smb_rqst::rq_iov... Instead, let's map the correct pages and offsets from vmalloc buffers as well in cifs_sg_set_buf() and then avoiding such oopses.Informations du CVE
Faiblesses connexes
| Nom de la faiblesse | Source | |
|---|---|---|
| No informations. |
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 To (excluding) 5.4.229
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.5 To (excluding) 5.10.163
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.87
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.0.16
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.1 To (excluding) 6.1.1
