CVE-2024-27080
13h05 +00:00
CVE の説明
btrfs: fix race when detecting delalloc ranges during fiemap
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: fix race when detecting delalloc ranges during fiemap For fiemap we recently stopped locking the target extent range for the whole duration of the fiemap call, in order to avoid a deadlock in a scenario where the fiemap buffer happens to be a memory mapped range of the same file. This use case is very unlikely to be useful in practice but it may be triggered by fuzz testing (syzbot, etc). This however introduced a race that makes us miss delalloc ranges for file regions that are currently holes, so the caller of fiemap will not be aware that there's data for some file regions. This can be quite serious for some use cases - for example in coreutils versions before 9.0, the cp program used fiemap to detect holes and data in the source file, copying only regions with data (extents or delalloc) from the source file to the destination file in order to preserve holes (see the documentation for its --sparse command line option). This means that if cp was used with a source file that had delalloc in a hole, the destination file could end up without that data, which is effectively a data loss issue, if it happened to hit the race described below. The race happens like this: 1) Fiemap is called, without the FIEMAP_FLAG_SYNC flag, for a file that has delalloc in the file range [64M, 65M[, which is currently a hole; 2) Fiemap locks the inode in shared mode, then starts iterating the inode's subvolume tree searching for file extent items, without having the whole fiemap target range locked in the inode's io tree - the change introduced recently by commit b0ad381fa769 ("btrfs: fix deadlock with fiemap and extent locking"). It only locks ranges in the io tree when it finds a hole or prealloc extent since that commit; 3) Note that fiemap clones each leaf before using it, and this is to avoid deadlocks when locking a file range in the inode's io tree and the fiemap buffer is memory mapped to some file, because writing to the page with btrfs_page_mkwrite() will wait on any ordered extent for the page's range and the ordered extent needs to lock the range and may need to modify the same leaf, therefore leading to a deadlock on the leaf; 4) While iterating the file extent items in the cloned leaf before finding the hole in the range [64M, 65M[, the delalloc in that range is flushed and its ordered extent completes - meaning the corresponding file extent item is in the inode's subvolume tree, but not present in the cloned leaf that fiemap is iterating over; 5) When fiemap finds the hole in the [64M, 65M[ range by seeing the gap in the cloned leaf (or a file extent item with disk_bytenr == 0 in case the NO_HOLES feature is not enabled), it will lock that file range in the inode's io tree and then search for delalloc by checking for the EXTENT_DELALLOC bit in the io tree for that range and ordered extents (with btrfs_find_delalloc_in_range()). But it finds nothing since the delalloc in that range was already flushed and the ordered extent completed and is gone - as a result fiemap will not report that there's delalloc or an extent for the range [64M, 65M[, so user space will be mislead into thinking that there's a hole in that range. This could actually be sporadically triggered with test case generic/094 from fstests, which reports a missing extent/delalloc range like this: generic/094 2s ... - output mismatch (see /home/fdmanana/git/hub/xfstests/results//generic/094.out.bad) --- tests/generic/094.out 2020-06-10 19:29:03.830519425 +0100 +++ /home/fdmanana/git/hub/xfstests/results//generic/094.out.bad 2024-02-28 11:00:00.381071525 +0000 @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ QA output created by 094 fiemap run with sync fiemap run without sync +ERROR: couldn't find extent at 7 +map is 'HHDDHPPDPHPH' +logical: [ 5.. 6] phys: ---truncated---CVE の情報
関連する弱点
| 弱点名 | 出典 | |
|---|---|---|
| Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently. |
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 | 4.7 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
詳細情報
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. High successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. 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. 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 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. |
nvd@nist.gov |
EPSS
EPSSスコア
EPSSパーセンタイル
関連製品
構成 0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ～から（含む） 6.6.24 ～まで（含まない） 6.6.26
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ～から（含む） 6.7.12 ～まで（含まない） 6.8
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.8
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.8
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.8
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.8.1
