CVE の説明

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xprtrdma: Repost Receive buffers for malformed replies rpcrdma_wc_receive() decrements the transport's Receive count for every completion before it dispatches a successful Receive to rpcrdma_reply_handler(). The handler must post a replacement Receive WR before returning unless ownership of the rep has moved elsewhere, as on the backchannel path. Commit 2ae50ad68cd7 ("xprtrdma: Close window between waking RPC senders and posting Receives") moved the Receive refill out of rpcrdma_wc_receive(), where it had run ahead of every reply, into rpcrdma_reply_handler() so that the responder's credit grant could be parsed before reposting. The bad-version and short-reply exits never reach that refill: they recycle the rep and return without calling rpcrdma_post_recvs(). A remote peer can therefore drain the client's posted Receive queue by sending a sustained stream of replies that are shorter than the fixed transport header or that carry an unrecognized RPC/RDMA version. Each such reply consumes one posted Receive without replacing it. Once the queue empties, the peer's next Send finds no posted Receive and the transport stalls until reconnect. Route both malformed-reply exits through the shared repost tail after recycling the rep, refilling against buf->rb_credits, the most recent accepted credit grant. Neither exit updates the congestion window, so RPCs admitted under the previous grant remain in flight awaiting replies. A smaller refill target would let a stream of malformed replies ratchet the posted Receive count down to the batch floor while the congestion window still admits rb_credits RPCs; a burst of valid replies to those RPCs could then overrun the posted Receives, and because the client connects with rnr_retry_count of zero, a single RNR NAK terminates the connection. Refilling against rb_credits also restores the target that applied to malformed replies before commit 2ae50ad68cd7 ("xprtrdma: Close window between waking RPC senders and posting Receives") when rpcrdma_post_recvs() computed it from rb_credits internally. rb_credits is at least one from connection establishment onward, so the repost path always keeps Receives posted.

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	7.5	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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. Network The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers). 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. 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.	416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67