CVE-2022-49337
02h10 +00:00
CVE 설명
ocfs2: dlmfs: fix error handling of user_dlm_destroy_lock
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ocfs2: dlmfs: fix error handling of user_dlm_destroy_lock When user_dlm_destroy_lock failed, it didn't clean up the flags it set before exit. For USER_LOCK_IN_TEARDOWN, if this function fails because of lock is still in used, next time when unlink invokes this function, it will return succeed, and then unlink will remove inode and dentry if lock is not in used(file closed), but the dlm lock is still linked in dlm lock resource, then when bast come in, it will trigger a panic due to user-after-free. See the following panic call trace. To fix this, USER_LOCK_IN_TEARDOWN should be reverted if fail. And also error should be returned if USER_LOCK_IN_TEARDOWN is set to let user know that unlink fail. For the case of ocfs2_dlm_unlock failure, besides USER_LOCK_IN_TEARDOWN, USER_LOCK_BUSY is also required to be cleared. Even though spin lock is released in between, but USER_LOCK_IN_TEARDOWN is still set, for USER_LOCK_BUSY, if before every place that waits on this flag, USER_LOCK_IN_TEARDOWN is checked to bail out, that will make sure no flow waits on the busy flag set by user_dlm_destroy_lock(), then we can simplely revert USER_LOCK_BUSY when ocfs2_dlm_unlock fails. Fix user_dlm_cluster_lock() which is the only function not following this. [ 941.336392] (python,26174,16):dlmfs_unlink:562 ERROR: unlink 004fb0000060000b5a90b8c847b72e1, error -16 from destroy [ 989.757536] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 989.757709] kernel BUG at fs/ocfs2/dlmfs/userdlm.c:173! [ 989.757876] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP [ 989.758027] Modules linked in: ksplice_2zhuk2jr_ib_ipoib_new(O) ksplice_2zhuk2jr(O) mptctl mptbase xen_netback xen_blkback xen_gntalloc xen_gntdev xen_evtchn cdc_ether usbnet mii ocfs2 jbd2 rpcsec_gss_krb5 auth_rpcgss nfsv4 nfsv3 nfs_acl nfs fscache lockd grace ocfs2_dlmfs ocfs2_stack_o2cb ocfs2_dlm ocfs2_nodemanager ocfs2_stackglue configfs bnx2fc fcoe libfcoe libfc scsi_transport_fc sunrpc ipmi_devintf bridge stp llc rds_rdma rds bonding ib_sdp ib_ipoib rdma_ucm ib_ucm ib_uverbs ib_umad rdma_cm ib_cm iw_cm falcon_lsm_serviceable(PE) falcon_nf_netcontain(PE) mlx4_vnic falcon_kal(E) falcon_lsm_pinned_13402(E) mlx4_ib ib_sa ib_mad ib_core ib_addr xenfs xen_privcmd dm_multipath iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support pcspkr sb_edac edac_core i2c_i801 lpc_ich mfd_core ipmi_ssif i2c_core ipmi_si ipmi_msghandler [ 989.760686] ioatdma sg ext3 jbd mbcache sd_mod ahci libahci ixgbe dca ptp pps_core vxlan udp_tunnel ip6_udp_tunnel megaraid_sas mlx4_core crc32c_intel be2iscsi bnx2i cnic uio cxgb4i cxgb4 cxgb3i libcxgbi ipv6 cxgb3 mdio libiscsi_tcp qla4xxx iscsi_boot_sysfs libiscsi scsi_transport_iscsi wmi dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log dm_mod [last unloaded: ksplice_2zhuk2jr_ib_ipoib_old] [ 989.761987] CPU: 10 PID: 19102 Comm: dlm_thread Tainted: P OE 4.1.12-124.57.1.el6uek.x86_64 #2 [ 989.762290] Hardware name: Oracle Corporation ORACLE SERVER X5-2/ASM,MOTHERBOARD,1U, BIOS 30350100 06/17/2021 [ 989.762599] task: ffff880178af6200 ti: ffff88017f7c8000 task.ti: ffff88017f7c8000 [ 989.762848] RIP: e030:[CVE 정보
관련 약점
| 약점 이름 | 출처 | |
|---|---|---|
| Improper Locking The product does not properly acquire or release a lock on a resource, leading to unexpected resource state changes and behaviors. |
메트릭
| 메트릭 | 점수 | 심각도 | CVSS 벡터 | 출처 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 7.8 | HIGH |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
추가 정보
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThese 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
추가 정보
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThese 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 점수
EPSS 백분위수
언급된 제품
구성 0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 까지 (미포함) 4.9.318
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 4.10 까지 (미포함) 4.14.283
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 4.15 까지 (미포함) 4.19.247
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 4.20 까지 (미포함) 5.4.198
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 5.5 까지 (미포함) 5.10.121
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 5.11 까지 (미포함) 5.15.46
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 5.16 까지 (미포함) 5.17.14
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 5.18 까지 (미포함) 5.18.3
