CVE の説明

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: usb: gadget: udc: bdc: free IRQ and drain func_wake_notify before teardown The Broadcom BDC UDC driver registers its IRQ handler with devm_request_irq() in bdc_udc_init(), so the IRQ is released by devm only after bdc_remove() returns. devm releases resources in reverse LIFO order, but bdc_remove() runs bdc_udc_exit() and bdc_hw_exit() -> bdc_mem_free() manually before returning: bdc_udc_exit() tears down individual endpoint objects via bdc_free_ep(), while bdc_hw_exit() -> bdc_mem_free() frees and NULLs the DMA-coherent status-report ring (bdc->srr.sr_bds) and kfree()s bdc->bdc_ep_array. Both happen while the IRQ handler (bdc_udc_interrupt, requested with IRQF_SHARED) remains deliverable in the window up to the post-remove devm free_irq(). On receipt of a shared interrupt in that window, bdc_udc_interrupt() dereferences bdc->srr.sr_bds[bdc->srr.dqp_index] (NULL or freed DMA) and dispatches sr_handler callbacks that index into bdc_ep_array, causing a NULL-deref or use-after-free. The same window affects the delayed_work bdc->func_wake_notify, which is armed from the IRQ handler via bdc_sr_uspc() -> handle_link_state_change() -> schedule_delayed_work() and may self-rearm from its own callback bdc_func_wake_timer(). No cancel exists anywhere in the driver, so a queued work item that fires after bdc_remove() returns and the bdc structure is devm-freed dereferences freed memory. Replace devm_request_irq() with request_irq() and add an explicit free_irq(bdc->irq, bdc) in bdc_remove(). Clear BDC_GIE before free_irq() to stop the device from asserting interrupts, then free_irq() drains any in-flight handler, then cancel_delayed_work_sync() drains the func_wake_notify delayed work. This ordering ensures the IRQ handler and delayed work cannot interfere with the subsequent endpoint and DMA teardown in bdc_udc_exit() and bdc_hw_exit(). Wire the matching free_irq() into the bdc_udc_init() error path so the IRQ is released on probe failure, and route the bdc_init_ep() failure through err0 instead of returning directly. This issue was found by an in-house static analysis tool.

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 詳細情報 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