CVE の説明

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nfsd: convert nfsd_net boolean flags to unsigned long flags word nfsd_net contains several boolean fields that are accessed from concurrent contexts without serialization. In particular, nfsd4_end_grace() guards its drain path with a plain bool: if (nn->grace_ended) return; nn->grace_ended = true; The read and the write are independent, and nothing in struct nfsd_net serializes them. At least two contexts can reach this code with no lock held: laundromat path laundry_wq kworker nfs4_laundromat() nfsd4_end_grace() RECLAIM_COMPLETE path nfsd compound kthread nfsd4_reclaim_complete() inc_reclaim_complete() nfsd4_end_grace() Both callers can observe grace_ended == false on different CPUs, both store true, and both proceed into nfsd4_record_grace_done(), which invokes the active client_tracking_ops->grace_done callback. For tracking ops that drain reclaim_str_hashtbl (legacy_tracking_ops via nfsd4_recdir_purge_old, and the cld v1+ ops via nfsd4_cld_grace_done), grace_done calls nfs4_release_reclaim(), which walks every bucket of reclaim_str_hashtbl with no lock and calls nfs4_remove_reclaim_record() (list_del + kfree) on each entry. Two concurrent walkers corrupt the list and double-free every nfs4_client_reclaim. A concurrent nfsd4_find_reclaim_client() iterating the same bucket reads through freed memory. A third call site exists in nfs4_state_start_net() on the skip_grace startup path, but it runs under nfsd_mutex before any client has connected and before the laundromat's first delayed work fires, so it cannot race with the two callers above. Replace the scattered boolean fields in nfsd_net with a single unsigned long flags word and an enum nfsd_net_flag for the bit positions. The grace_ended race is fixed by using test_and_set_bit(), which is atomic on all architectures. The remaining flags (grace_end_forced, in_grace, somebody_reclaimed, track_reclaim_completes, nfsd_net_up, lockd_up) are converted to use test_bit/set_bit/clear_bit for consistency. This avoids sub-word cmpxchg issues on architectures like Hexagon that only support word-sized atomic operations.

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	8.1	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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. High successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. 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