CVE-2022-49049 : Detail

CVE-2022-49049

5.5
/
Sedang
0.04%V4
2025-02-26
01h54 +00:00
Local
2025-05-04
08h28 +00:00
Notifikasi untuk CVE tertentu
Tetap terinformasi tentang perubahan untuk CVE tertentu.
Kelola notifikasi

Deskripsi CVE

mm/secretmem: fix panic when growing a memfd_secret

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/secretmem: fix panic when growing a memfd_secret When one tries to grow an existing memfd_secret with ftruncate, one gets a panic [1]. For example, doing the following reliably induces the panic: fd = memfd_secret(); ftruncate(fd, 10); ptr = mmap(NULL, 10, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0); strcpy(ptr, "123456789"); munmap(ptr, 10); ftruncate(fd, 20); The basic reason for this is, when we grow with ftruncate, we call down into simple_setattr, and then truncate_inode_pages_range, and eventually we try to zero part of the memory. The normal truncation code does this via the direct map (i.e., it calls page_address() and hands that to memset()). For memfd_secret though, we specifically don't map our pages via the direct map (i.e. we call set_direct_map_invalid_noflush() on every fault). So the address returned by page_address() isn't useful, and when we try to memset() with it we panic. This patch avoids the panic by implementing a custom setattr for memfd_secret, which detects resizes specifically (setting the size for the first time works just fine, since there are no existing pages to try to zero), and rejects them with EINVAL. One could argue growing should be supported, but I think that will require a significantly more lengthy change. So, I propose a minimal fix for the benefit of stable kernels, and then perhaps to extend memfd_secret to support growing in a separate patch. [1]: BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: ffffa0a889277028 #PF: supervisor write access in kernel mode #PF: error_code(0x0002) - not-present page PGD afa01067 P4D afa01067 PUD 83f909067 PMD 83f8bf067 PTE 800ffffef6d88060 Oops: 0002 [#1] PREEMPT SMP DEBUG_PAGEALLOC PTI CPU: 0 PID: 281 Comm: repro Not tainted 5.17.0-dbg-DEV #1 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:memset_erms+0x9/0x10 Code: c1 e9 03 40 0f b6 f6 48 b8 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 48 0f af c6 f3 48 ab 89 d1 f3 aa 4c 89 c8 c3 90 49 89 f9 40 88 f0 48 89 d1 aa 4c 89 c8 c3 90 49 89 fa 40 0f b6 ce 48 b8 01 01 01 01 01 01 RSP: 0018:ffffb932c09afbf0 EFLAGS: 00010246 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffda63c4249dc0 RCX: 0000000000000fd8 RDX: 0000000000000fd8 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: ffffa0a889277028 RBP: ffffb932c09afc00 R08: 0000000000001000 R09: ffffa0a889277028 R10: 0000000000020023 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffffda63c4249dc0 R13: ffffa0a890d70d98 R14: 0000000000000028 R15: 0000000000000fd8 FS: 00007f7294899580(0000) GS:ffffa0af9bc00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: ffffa0a889277028 CR3: 0000000107ef6006 CR4: 0000000000370ef0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 Call Trace: ? zero_user_segments+0x82/0x190 truncate_inode_partial_folio+0xd4/0x2a0 truncate_inode_pages_range+0x380/0x830 truncate_setsize+0x63/0x80 simple_setattr+0x37/0x60 notify_change+0x3d8/0x4d0 do_sys_ftruncate+0x162/0x1d0 __x64_sys_ftruncate+0x1c/0x20 do_syscall_64+0x44/0xa0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae Modules linked in: xhci_pci xhci_hcd virtio_net net_failover failover virtio_blk virtio_balloon uhci_hcd ohci_pci ohci_hcd evdev ehci_pci ehci_hcd 9pnet_virtio 9p netfs 9pnet CR2: ffffa0a889277028 [lkp@intel.com: secretmem_iops can be static] [axelrasmussen@google.com: return EINVAL]

Informasi CVE

Kelemahan Terkait

CWE-ID Nama Kelemahan Sumber
CWE Other Tidak ada informasi.

Metrik

Metrik Skor Tingkat keparahan CVSS Vektor Sumber
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 adalah model penilaian yang memprediksi kemungkinan suatu kerentanan dieksploitasi.

Skor EPSS

Model EPSS menghasilkan skor probabilitas antara 0 dan 1 (0 hingga 100%). Semakin tinggi skor, semakin besar probabilitas bahwa suatu kerentanan akan dieksploitasi.

Persentil EPSS

Persentil digunakan untuk meranking CVE berdasarkan skor EPSS mereka. Misalnya, CVE di persentil ke-95 berdasarkan skor EPSS-nya lebih mungkin dieksploitasi daripada 95% CVE lainnya. Dengan demikian, persentil digunakan untuk membandingkan skor EPSS suatu CVE dengan CVE lainnya.

Produk yang Disebutkan

Konfigurasi 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Dari (termasuk) 5.14 Hingga (tidak termasuk) 5.15.35

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Dari (termasuk) 5.16 Hingga (tidak termasuk) 5.17.4

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.18

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.18

Referensi