CVE-2022-48721 : 詳細

CVE-2022-48721

7.8
/
高
0.03%V4
2024-06-20
11h13 +00:00
Local
2026-08-04
09h02 +00:00
特定のCVEの通知
特定のCVEの変更情報をいち早くお届けします。
通知を管理する

CVE の説明

net/smc: Forward wakeup to smc socket waitqueue after fallback

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/smc: Forward wakeup to smc socket waitqueue after fallback When we replace TCP with SMC and a fallback occurs, there may be some socket waitqueue entries remaining in smc socket->wq, such as eppoll_entries inserted by userspace applications. After the fallback, data flows over TCP/IP and only clcsocket->wq will be woken up. Applications can't be notified by the entries which were inserted in smc socket->wq before fallback. So we need a mechanism to wake up smc socket->wq at the same time if some entries remaining in it. The current workaround is to transfer the entries from smc socket->wq to clcsock->wq during the fallback. But this may cause a crash like this: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0xdead000000000100: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI CPU: 3 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/3 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G E 5.16.0+ #107 RIP: 0010:__wake_up_common+0x65/0x170 Call Trace: __wake_up_common_lock+0x7a/0xc0 sock_def_readable+0x3c/0x70 tcp_data_queue+0x4a7/0xc40 tcp_rcv_established+0x32f/0x660 ? sk_filter_trim_cap+0xcb/0x2e0 tcp_v4_do_rcv+0x10b/0x260 tcp_v4_rcv+0xd2a/0xde0 ip_protocol_deliver_rcu+0x3b/0x1d0 ip_local_deliver_finish+0x54/0x60 ip_local_deliver+0x6a/0x110 ? tcp_v4_early_demux+0xa2/0x140 ? tcp_v4_early_demux+0x10d/0x140 ip_sublist_rcv_finish+0x49/0x60 ip_sublist_rcv+0x19d/0x230 ip_list_rcv+0x13e/0x170 __netif_receive_skb_list_core+0x1c2/0x240 netif_receive_skb_list_internal+0x1e6/0x320 napi_complete_done+0x11d/0x190 mlx5e_napi_poll+0x163/0x6b0 [mlx5_core] __napi_poll+0x3c/0x1b0 net_rx_action+0x27c/0x300 __do_softirq+0x114/0x2d2 irq_exit_rcu+0xb4/0xe0 common_interrupt+0xba/0xe0 The crash is caused by privately transferring waitqueue entries from smc socket->wq to clcsock->wq. The owners of these entries, such as epoll, have no idea that the entries have been transferred to a different socket wait queue and still use original waitqueue spinlock (smc socket->wq.wait.lock) to make the entries operation exclusive, but it doesn't work. The operations to the entries, such as removing from the waitqueue (now is clcsock->wq after fallback), may cause a crash when clcsock waitqueue is being iterated over at the moment. This patch tries to fix this by no longer transferring wait queue entries privately, but introducing own implementations of clcsock's callback functions in fallback situation. The callback functions will forward the wakeup to smc socket->wq if clcsock->wq is actually woken up and smc socket->wq has remaining entries.

CVE の情報

関連する弱点

CWE-ID 弱点名 出典
CWE Other 情報がありません。

メトリクス

メトリクス スコア 深刻度 CVSS ベクター 出典
V3.1 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.

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 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.

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は脆弱性が悪用される可能性を予測するスコアリングモデルです。

EPSSスコア

EPSSモデルは0から1(0〜100%)の確率スコアを算出します。スコアが高いほど、脆弱性が悪用される可能性が高いことを示します。

EPSSパーセンタイル

パーセンタイルはCVEをEPSSスコアで順位付けするために使用されます。例えば、EPSSスコアで95パーセンタイルにあるCVEは、他の95%のCVEよりも悪用される可能性が高いことを意味します。パーセンタイルはCVEのEPSSスコアを他のCVEと比較するために使用されます。

関連製品

構成 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ~から(含む) 5.4.164 ~まで(含まない) 5.5

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ~から(含む) 5.10.84 ~まで(含まない) 5.11

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ~から(含む) 5.15.7 ~まで(含まない) 5.15.22

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ~から(含む) 5.16.1 ~まで(含まない) 5.16.8

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.16

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.16

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.16

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.16

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.16

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.16

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.16

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.16

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.17

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.17

参考資料