CVE-2023-53846 : 詳細

CVE-2023-53846

7.8
/
高
0.03%V4
2025-12-09
16h17 +00:00
Local
2026-10-30
13h17 +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

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: f2fs: fix to do sanity check on direct node in truncate_dnode() syzbot reports below bug: BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in f2fs_truncate_data_blocks_range+0x122a/0x14c0 fs/f2fs/file.c:574 Read of size 4 at addr ffff88802a25c000 by task syz-executor148/5000 CPU: 1 PID: 5000 Comm: syz-executor148 Not tainted 6.4.0-rc7-syzkaller-00041-ge660abd551f1 #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 05/27/2023 Call Trace: __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:88 [inline] dump_stack_lvl+0xd9/0x150 lib/dump_stack.c:106 print_address_description.constprop.0+0x2c/0x3c0 mm/kasan/report.c:351 print_report mm/kasan/report.c:462 [inline] kasan_report+0x11c/0x130 mm/kasan/report.c:572 f2fs_truncate_data_blocks_range+0x122a/0x14c0 fs/f2fs/file.c:574 truncate_dnode+0x229/0x2e0 fs/f2fs/node.c:944 f2fs_truncate_inode_blocks+0x64b/0xde0 fs/f2fs/node.c:1154 f2fs_do_truncate_blocks+0x4ac/0xf30 fs/f2fs/file.c:721 f2fs_truncate_blocks+0x7b/0x300 fs/f2fs/file.c:749 f2fs_truncate.part.0+0x4a5/0x630 fs/f2fs/file.c:799 f2fs_truncate include/linux/fs.h:825 [inline] f2fs_setattr+0x1738/0x2090 fs/f2fs/file.c:1006 notify_change+0xb2c/0x1180 fs/attr.c:483 do_truncate+0x143/0x200 fs/open.c:66 handle_truncate fs/namei.c:3295 [inline] do_open fs/namei.c:3640 [inline] path_openat+0x2083/0x2750 fs/namei.c:3791 do_filp_open+0x1ba/0x410 fs/namei.c:3818 do_sys_openat2+0x16d/0x4c0 fs/open.c:1356 do_sys_open fs/open.c:1372 [inline] __do_sys_creat fs/open.c:1448 [inline] __se_sys_creat fs/open.c:1442 [inline] __x64_sys_creat+0xcd/0x120 fs/open.c:1442 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x39/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd The root cause is, inodeA references inodeB via inodeB's ino, once inodeA is truncated, it calls truncate_dnode() to truncate data blocks in inodeB's node page, it traverse mapping data from node->i.i_addr[0] to node->i.i_addr[ADDRS_PER_BLOCK() - 1], result in out-of-boundary access. This patch fixes to add sanity check on dnode page in truncate_dnode(), so that, it can help to avoid triggering such issue, and once it encounters such issue, it will record newly introduced ERROR_INVALID_NODE_REFERENCE error into superblock, later fsck can detect such issue and try repairing. Also, it removes f2fs_truncate_data_blocks() for cleanup due to the function has only one caller, and uses f2fs_truncate_data_blocks_range() instead.

CVE の情報

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.

416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

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。

参考資料