CVE-2024-43880
00h06 +00:00
CVE の説明
mlxsw: spectrum_acl_erp: Fix object nesting warning
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mlxsw: spectrum_acl_erp: Fix object nesting warning ACLs in Spectrum-2 and newer ASICs can reside in the algorithmic TCAM (A-TCAM) or in the ordinary circuit TCAM (C-TCAM). The former can contain more ACLs (i.e., tc filters), but the number of masks in each region (i.e., tc chain) is limited. In order to mitigate the effects of the above limitation, the device allows filters to share a single mask if their masks only differ in up to 8 consecutive bits. For example, dst_ip/25 can be represented using dst_ip/24 with a delta of 1 bit. The C-TCAM does not have a limit on the number of masks being used (and therefore does not support mask aggregation), but can contain a limited number of filters. The driver uses the "objagg" library to perform the mask aggregation by passing it objects that consist of the filter's mask and whether the filter is to be inserted into the A-TCAM or the C-TCAM since filters in different TCAMs cannot share a mask. The set of created objects is dependent on the insertion order of the filters and is not necessarily optimal. Therefore, the driver will periodically ask the library to compute a more optimal set ("hints") by looking at all the existing objects. When the library asks the driver whether two objects can be aggregated the driver only compares the provided masks and ignores the A-TCAM / C-TCAM indication. This is the right thing to do since the goal is to move as many filters as possible to the A-TCAM. The driver also forbids two identical masks from being aggregated since this can only happen if one was intentionally put in the C-TCAM to avoid a conflict in the A-TCAM. The above can result in the following set of hints: H1: {mask X, A-TCAM} -> H2: {mask Y, A-TCAM} // X is Y + delta H3: {mask Y, C-TCAM} -> H4: {mask Z, A-TCAM} // Y is Z + delta After getting the hints from the library the driver will start migrating filters from one region to another while consulting the computed hints and instructing the device to perform a lookup in both regions during the transition. Assuming a filter with mask X is being migrated into the A-TCAM in the new region, the hints lookup will return H1. Since H2 is the parent of H1, the library will try to find the object associated with it and create it if necessary in which case another hints lookup (recursive) will be performed. This hints lookup for {mask Y, A-TCAM} will either return H2 or H3 since the driver passes the library an object comparison function that ignores the A-TCAM / C-TCAM indication. This can eventually lead to nested objects which are not supported by the library [1]. Fix by removing the object comparison function from both the driver and the library as the driver was the only user. That way the lookup will only return exact matches. I do not have a reliable reproducer that can reproduce the issue in a timely manner, but before the fix the issue would reproduce in several minutes and with the fix it does not reproduce in over an hour. Note that the current usefulness of the hints is limited because they include the C-TCAM indication and represent aggregation that cannot actually happen. This will be addressed in net-next. [1] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 153 at lib/objagg.c:170 objagg_obj_parent_assign+0xb5/0xd0 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 PID: 153 Comm: kworker/0:18 Not tainted 6.9.0-rc6-custom-g70fbc2c1c38b #42 Hardware name: Mellanox Technologies Ltd. MSN3700C/VMOD0008, BIOS 5.11 10/10/2018 Workqueue: mlxsw_core mlxsw_sp_acl_tcam_vregion_rehash_work RIP: 0010:objagg_obj_parent_assign+0xb5/0xd0 [...] Call Trace:CVE の情報
関連する弱点
| 弱点名 | 出典 | |
|---|---|---|
| Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime The product does not sufficiently track and release allocated memory after it has been used, making the memory unavailable for reallocation and reuse. |
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
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. 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. |
|
| V3.1 | 5.5 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/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. 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. 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） 5.1 ～まで（含まない） 5.4.282
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ～から（含む） 5.5 ～まで（含まない） 5.10.224
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ～から（含む） 5.11 ～まで（含まない） 5.15.165
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ～から（含む） 5.16 ～まで（含まない） 6.1.103
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ～から（含む） 6.2 ～まで（含まない） 6.6.44
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ～から（含む） 6.7 ～まで（含まない） 6.10.3
