CVE-2025-68736
12h09 +00:00
Deskripsi CVE
landlock: Fix handling of disconnected directories
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: landlock: Fix handling of disconnected directories Disconnected files or directories can appear when they are visible and opened from a bind mount, but have been renamed or moved from the source of the bind mount in a way that makes them inaccessible from the mount point (i.e. out of scope). Previously, access rights tied to files or directories opened through a disconnected directory were collected by walking the related hierarchy down to the root of the filesystem, without taking into account the mount point because it couldn't be found. This could lead to inconsistent access results, potential access right widening, and hard-to-debug renames, especially since such paths cannot be printed. For a sandboxed task to create a disconnected directory, it needs to have write access (i.e. FS_MAKE_REG, FS_REMOVE_FILE, and FS_REFER) to the underlying source of the bind mount, and read access to the related mount point. Because a sandboxed task cannot acquire more access rights than those defined by its Landlock domain, this could lead to inconsistent access rights due to missing permissions that should be inherited from the mount point hierarchy, while inheriting permissions from the filesystem hierarchy hidden by this mount point instead. Landlock now handles files and directories opened from disconnected directories by taking into account the filesystem hierarchy when the mount point is not found in the hierarchy walk, and also always taking into account the mount point from which these disconnected directories were opened. This ensures that a rename is not allowed if it would widen access rights [1]. The rationale is that, even if disconnected hierarchies might not be visible or accessible to a sandboxed task, relying on the collected access rights from them improves the guarantee that access rights will not be widened during a rename because of the access right comparison between the source and the destination (see LANDLOCK_ACCESS_FS_REFER). It may look like this would grant more access on disconnected files and directories, but the security policies are always enforced for all the evaluated hierarchies. This new behavior should be less surprising to users and safer from an access control perspective. Remove a wrong WARN_ON_ONCE() canary in collect_domain_accesses() and fix the related comment. Because opened files have their access rights stored in the related file security properties, there is no impact for disconnected or unlinked files.Informasi CVE
Metrik
| Metrik | Skor | Tingkat keparahan | CVSS Vektor | Sumber |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 8.8 | HIGH |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/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. Changed An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities. 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. |
