CVE-2025-40206
21h56 +00:00
Deskripsi CVE
netfilter: nft_objref: validate objref and objrefmap expressions
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfilter: nft_objref: validate objref and objrefmap expressions Referencing a synproxy stateful object from OUTPUT hook causes kernel crash due to infinite recursive calls: BUG: TASK stack guard page was hit at 000000008bda5b8c (stack is 000000003ab1c4a5..00000000494d8b12) [...] Call Trace: __find_rr_leaf+0x99/0x230 fib6_table_lookup+0x13b/0x2d0 ip6_pol_route+0xa4/0x400 fib6_rule_lookup+0x156/0x240 ip6_route_output_flags+0xc6/0x150 __nf_ip6_route+0x23/0x50 synproxy_send_tcp_ipv6+0x106/0x200 synproxy_send_client_synack_ipv6+0x1aa/0x1f0 nft_synproxy_do_eval+0x263/0x310 nft_do_chain+0x5a8/0x5f0 [nf_tables nft_do_chain_inet+0x98/0x110 nf_hook_slow+0x43/0xc0 __ip6_local_out+0xf0/0x170 ip6_local_out+0x17/0x70 synproxy_send_tcp_ipv6+0x1a2/0x200 synproxy_send_client_synack_ipv6+0x1aa/0x1f0 [...] Implement objref and objrefmap expression validate functions. Currently, only NFT_OBJECT_SYNPROXY object type requires validation. This will also handle a jump to a chain using a synproxy object from the OUTPUT hook. Now when trying to reference a synproxy object in the OUTPUT hook, nft will produce the following error: synproxy_crash.nft: Error: Could not process rule: Operation not supported synproxy name mysynproxy ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Informasi CVE
Metrik
| Metrik | Skor | Tingkat keparahan | CVSS Vektor | Sumber |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 7.8 | HIGH |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Informasi lebih lanjut
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. |
