Descriptions du CVE

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: move ext4_percpu_param_init() before ext4_mb_init() When running `kvm-xfstests -c ext4/1k -C 1 generic/383` with the `DOUBLE_CHECK` macro defined, the following panic is triggered: ================================================================== EXT4-fs error (device vdc): ext4_validate_block_bitmap:423: comm mount: bg 0: bad block bitmap checksum BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: ff110000fa2cc000 PGD 3e01067 P4D 3e02067 PUD 0 Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP NOPTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 2386 Comm: mount Tainted: G W 6.18.0-gba65a4e7120a-dirty #1152 PREEMPT(none) RIP: 0010:percpu_counter_add_batch+0x13/0xa0 Call Trace: ext4_mark_group_bitmap_corrupted+0xcb/0xe0 ext4_validate_block_bitmap+0x2a1/0x2f0 ext4_read_block_bitmap+0x33/0x50 mb_group_bb_bitmap_alloc+0x33/0x80 ext4_mb_add_groupinfo+0x190/0x250 ext4_mb_init_backend+0x87/0x290 ext4_mb_init+0x456/0x640 __ext4_fill_super+0x1072/0x1680 ext4_fill_super+0xd3/0x280 get_tree_bdev_flags+0x132/0x1d0 vfs_get_tree+0x29/0xd0 vfs_cmd_create+0x59/0xe0 __do_sys_fsconfig+0x4f6/0x6b0 do_syscall_64+0x50/0x1f0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e ================================================================== This issue can be reproduced using the following commands: mkfs.ext4 -F -q -b 1024 /dev/sda 5G tune2fs -O quota,project /dev/sda mount /dev/sda /tmp/test With DOUBLE_CHECK defined, mb_group_bb_bitmap_alloc() reads and validates the block bitmap. When the validation fails, ext4_mark_group_bitmap_corrupted() attempts to update sbi->s_freeclusters_counter. However, this percpu_counter has not been initialized yet at this point, which leads to the panic described above. Fix this by moving the execution of ext4_percpu_param_init() to occur before ext4_mb_init(), ensuring the per-CPU counters are initialized before they are used.

Informations du CVE

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID	Nom de la faiblesse	Source
CWE-908	Use of Uninitialized Resource The product uses or accesses a resource that has not been initialized.

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 More informations 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