CVE-2024-46755 : 詳細

CVE-2024-46755

8.8
/
高
0.01%V4
2024-09-18
07h12 +00:00
Memory Corruption
Adjacent
2026-08-04
09h31 +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

wifi: mwifiex: Do not return unused priv in mwifiex_get_priv_by_id()

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: wifi: mwifiex: Do not return unused priv in mwifiex_get_priv_by_id() mwifiex_get_priv_by_id() returns the priv pointer corresponding to the bss_num and bss_type, but without checking if the priv is actually currently in use. Unused priv pointers do not have a wiphy attached to them which can lead to NULL pointer dereferences further down the callstack. Fix this by returning only used priv pointers which have priv->bss_mode set to something else than NL80211_IFTYPE_UNSPECIFIED. Said NULL pointer dereference happened when an Accesspoint was started with wpa_supplicant -i mlan0 with this config: network={ ssid="somessid" mode=2 frequency=2412 key_mgmt=WPA-PSK WPA-PSK-SHA256 proto=RSN group=CCMP pairwise=CCMP psk="12345678" } When waiting for the AP to be established, interrupting wpa_supplicant with and starting it again this happens: | Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000000000000140 | Mem abort info: | ESR = 0x0000000096000004 | EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits | SET = 0, FnV = 0 | EA = 0, S1PTW = 0 | FSC = 0x04: level 0 translation fault | Data abort info: | ISV = 0, ISS = 0x00000004, ISS2 = 0x00000000 | CM = 0, WnR = 0, TnD = 0, TagAccess = 0 | GCS = 0, Overlay = 0, DirtyBit = 0, Xs = 0 | user pgtable: 4k pages, 48-bit VAs, pgdp=0000000046d96000 | [0000000000000140] pgd=0000000000000000, p4d=0000000000000000 | Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000004 [#1] PREEMPT SMP | Modules linked in: caam_jr caamhash_desc spidev caamalg_desc crypto_engine authenc libdes mwifiex_sdio +mwifiex crct10dif_ce cdc_acm onboard_usb_hub fsl_imx8_ddr_perf imx8m_ddrc rtc_ds1307 lm75 rtc_snvs +imx_sdma caam imx8mm_thermal spi_imx error imx_cpufreq_dt fuse ip_tables x_tables ipv6 | CPU: 0 PID: 8 Comm: kworker/0:1 Not tainted 6.9.0-00007-g937242013fce-dirty #18 | Hardware name: somemachine (DT) | Workqueue: events sdio_irq_work | pstate: 00000005 (nzcv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) | pc : mwifiex_get_cfp+0xd8/0x15c [mwifiex] | lr : mwifiex_get_cfp+0x34/0x15c [mwifiex] | sp : ffff8000818b3a70 | x29: ffff8000818b3a70 x28: ffff000006bfd8a5 x27: 0000000000000004 | x26: 000000000000002c x25: 0000000000001511 x24: 0000000002e86bc9 | x23: ffff000006bfd996 x22: 0000000000000004 x21: ffff000007bec000 | x20: 000000000000002c x19: 0000000000000000 x18: 0000000000000000 | x17: 000000040044ffff x16: 00500072b5503510 x15: ccc283740681e517 | x14: 0201000101006d15 x13: 0000000002e8ff43 x12: 002c01000000ffb1 | x11: 0100000000000000 x10: 02e8ff43002c0100 x9 : 0000ffb100100157 | x8 : ffff000003d20000 x7 : 00000000000002f1 x6 : 00000000ffffe124 | x5 : 0000000000000001 x4 : 0000000000000003 x3 : 0000000000000000 | x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : 0001000000011001 x0 : 0000000000000000 | Call trace: | mwifiex_get_cfp+0xd8/0x15c [mwifiex] | mwifiex_parse_single_response_buf+0x1d0/0x504 [mwifiex] | mwifiex_handle_event_ext_scan_report+0x19c/0x2f8 [mwifiex] | mwifiex_process_sta_event+0x298/0xf0c [mwifiex] | mwifiex_process_event+0x110/0x238 [mwifiex] | mwifiex_main_process+0x428/0xa44 [mwifiex] | mwifiex_sdio_interrupt+0x64/0x12c [mwifiex_sdio] | process_sdio_pending_irqs+0x64/0x1b8 | sdio_irq_work+0x4c/0x7c | process_one_work+0x148/0x2a0 | worker_thread+0x2fc/0x40c | kthread+0x110/0x114 | ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 | Code: a94153f3 a8c37bfd d50323bf d65f03c0 (f940a000) | ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---

CVE の情報

関連する弱点

CWE-ID 弱点名 出典
CWE-476 NULL Pointer Dereference
The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.

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 8.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/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.

Adjacent

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).

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.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

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 ~まで(含まない) 4.19.322

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ~から(含む) 4.20 ~まで(含まない) 5.4.284

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ~から(含む) 5.5 ~まで(含まない) 5.10.226

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ~から(含む) 5.11 ~まで(含まない) 5.15.167

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ~から(含む) 5.16 ~まで(含まない) 6.1.110

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ~から(含む) 6.2 ~まで(含まない) 6.6.51

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version ~から(含む) 6.7 ~まで(含まない) 6.10.10

参考資料