CVE の説明

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xprtrdma: Decouple req recycling from RPC completion rl_kref formerly served two distinct lifetimes through a single refcount: it gated when a Reply could wake its RPC task, and it gated when an rpcrdma_req could return to its free pool. The marshal path took the Send-side reference only when SGEs needed DMA-unmap (sc_unmap_count > 0), which made a Send carrying only pre-registered buffers an exception: the Reply handler dropped rl_kref from 1 to 0 and freed the req while the HCA might still be DMA-reading from its send buffer. Give rl_kref a narrower job. The RPC layer takes one reference when slot allocation hands a req out. rpcrdma_prepare_send_sges() takes a Send-side reference unconditionally after WR preparation succeeds. xprt_rdma_free_slot() and xprt_rdma_bc_free_rqst() drop the RPC-layer reference; rpcrdma_sendctx_unmap() drops the Send-side reference. The req returns to its free pool only after both owners have signed off. The existing kref_init(&req->rl_kref) call in rpcrdma_prepare_send_sges() is removed. Initialization moves to the slot-allocation paths (xprt_rdma_alloc_slot and rpcrdma_bc_rqst_get), and the release callback re-arms rl_kref before the req returns to a free pool. A re-init in the marshal path would discard the RPC-layer reference that already exists on entry. Three invariants follow: - Any rpcrdma_req held by an rpc_rqst has rl_kref >= 1. xprt_rdma_alloc_slot(), rpcrdma_bc_rqst_get(), and the backlog-wake branch in xprt_rdma_alloc_slot() each kref_init rl_kref before publishing the req. Without this invariant, an RPC task that aborts between slot allocation and marshal (gss_refresh failure or signal during call_connect, for example) would drive xprt_release() -> xprt_rdma_free_slot() -> kref_put against a refcount of zero, saturating refcount_t and stranding the slot. - The Send-side reference is taken only after WR prep succeeds. A mapping failure in rpcrdma_prepare_send_sges() runs rpcrdma_sendctx_cancel(), which DMA-unmaps the sendctx and clears sc_req without touching rl_kref. The sendctx ring walks in rpcrdma_sendctx_put_locked() and rpcrdma_sendctxs_destroy() skip entries with sc_req == NULL, so a burst of -EIO marshal failures cannot hold reqs off rb_send_bufs. - The release callback re-arms rl_kref so the next consumer enters with the invariant satisfied. Replies now complete the RPC directly. rpcrdma_reply_handler() calls rpcrdma_complete_rqst() in place of kref_put on the non-LocalInv branch. The LocalInv branch already completes the RPC from frwr_unmap_async() and is unaffected. Because Send-side references can now outlive RPC completion, connection teardown drains sendctx entries whose unsignaled Sends never had a later signaled completion to walk the ring. rpcrdma_sendctxs_destroy() walks the active range and runs rpcrdma_sendctx_unmap() on each entry with a non-NULL sc_req before the request buffers are reset, and is moved ahead of rpcrdma_reqs_reset() in rpcrdma_xprt_disconnect() so the reqs are still in their pre-reset state when the Send-side refs are released. The drain creates a teardown-ordering hazard on the backchannel path. With the new lifetime, releasing a bc_prealloc req from rpcrdma_req_release() re-adds it to bc_pa_list. The disconnect in xprt_rdma_destroy() runs after xprt_destroy_backchannel() has already emptied bc_pa_list, so the drained reqs would otherwise leak. xprt_rdma_destroy() now runs xprt_rdma_bc_destroy(xprt, 0) a second time after the disconnect to reclaim them.

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	9.8	CRITICAL	CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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. 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. 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