CVE-2023-53100 : 상세 정보

CVE-2023-53100

7.8
/
높음
0.01%V4
2025-05-02
16h15 +00:00
Local
2026-10-15
22h17 +00:00
특정 CVE 알림
특정 CVE의 변경 사항에 대한 정보를 받아보세요.
알림 관리

CVE 설명

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: fix WARNING in ext4_update_inline_data Syzbot found the following issue: EXT4-fs (loop0): mounted filesystem 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000 without journal. Quota mode: none. fscrypt: AES-256-CTS-CBC using implementation "cts-cbc-aes-aesni" fscrypt: AES-256-XTS using implementation "xts-aes-aesni" ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 5071 at mm/page_alloc.c:5525 __alloc_pages+0x30a/0x560 mm/page_alloc.c:5525 Modules linked in: CPU: 1 PID: 5071 Comm: syz-executor263 Not tainted 6.2.0-rc1-syzkaller #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/26/2022 RIP: 0010:__alloc_pages+0x30a/0x560 mm/page_alloc.c:5525 RSP: 0018:ffffc90003c2f1c0 EFLAGS: 00010246 RAX: ffffc90003c2f220 RBX: 0000000000000014 RCX: 0000000000000000 RDX: 0000000000000028 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: ffffc90003c2f248 RBP: ffffc90003c2f2d8 R08: dffffc0000000000 R09: ffffc90003c2f220 R10: fffff52000785e49 R11: 1ffff92000785e44 R12: 0000000000040d40 R13: 1ffff92000785e40 R14: dffffc0000000000 R15: 1ffff92000785e3c FS: 0000555556c0d300(0000) GS:ffff8880b9800000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007f95d5e04138 CR3: 00000000793aa000 CR4: 00000000003506f0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 Call Trace: __alloc_pages_node include/linux/gfp.h:237 [inline] alloc_pages_node include/linux/gfp.h:260 [inline] __kmalloc_large_node+0x95/0x1e0 mm/slab_common.c:1113 __do_kmalloc_node mm/slab_common.c:956 [inline] __kmalloc+0xfe/0x190 mm/slab_common.c:981 kmalloc include/linux/slab.h:584 [inline] kzalloc include/linux/slab.h:720 [inline] ext4_update_inline_data+0x236/0x6b0 fs/ext4/inline.c:346 ext4_update_inline_dir fs/ext4/inline.c:1115 [inline] ext4_try_add_inline_entry+0x328/0x990 fs/ext4/inline.c:1307 ext4_add_entry+0x5a4/0xeb0 fs/ext4/namei.c:2385 ext4_add_nondir+0x96/0x260 fs/ext4/namei.c:2772 ext4_create+0x36c/0x560 fs/ext4/namei.c:2817 lookup_open fs/namei.c:3413 [inline] open_last_lookups fs/namei.c:3481 [inline] path_openat+0x12ac/0x2dd0 fs/namei.c:3711 do_filp_open+0x264/0x4f0 fs/namei.c:3741 do_sys_openat2+0x124/0x4e0 fs/open.c:1310 do_sys_open fs/open.c:1326 [inline] __do_sys_openat fs/open.c:1342 [inline] __se_sys_openat fs/open.c:1337 [inline] __x64_sys_openat+0x243/0x290 fs/open.c:1337 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x3d/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd Above issue happens as follows: ext4_iget ext4_find_inline_data_nolock ->i_inline_off=164 i_inline_size=60 ext4_try_add_inline_entry __ext4_mark_inode_dirty ext4_expand_extra_isize_ea ->i_extra_isize=32 s_want_extra_isize=44 ext4_xattr_shift_entries ->after shift i_inline_off is incorrect, actually is change to 176 ext4_try_add_inline_entry ext4_update_inline_dir get_max_inline_xattr_value_size if (EXT4_I(inode)->i_inline_off) entry = (struct ext4_xattr_entry *)((void *)raw_inode + EXT4_I(inode)->i_inline_off); free += EXT4_XATTR_SIZE(le32_to_cpu(entry->e_value_size)); ->As entry is incorrect, then 'free' may be negative ext4_update_inline_data value = kzalloc(len, GFP_NOFS); -> len is unsigned int, maybe very large, then trigger warning when 'kzalloc()' To resolve the above issue we need to update 'i_inline_off' after 'ext4_xattr_shift_entries()'. We do not need to set EXT4_STATE_MAY_INLINE_DATA flag here, since ext4_mark_inode_dirty() already sets this flag if needed. Setting EXT4_STATE_MAY_INLINE_DATA when it is needed may trigger a BUG_ON in ext4_writepages().

CVE 정보

관련 약점

CWE-ID 약점 이름 출처
CWE Other 정보 없음.

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

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
V3.1 5.5 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

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.

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.

nvd@nist.gov

EPSS

EPSS는 취약점이 악용될 가능성을 예측하는 점수 모델입니다.

EPSS 점수

EPSS 모델은 0과 1(0~100%) 사이의 확률 점수를 생성합니다. 점수가 높을수록 취약점이 악용될 가능성이 높습니다.

EPSS 백분위수

백분위수는 EPSS 점수에 따라 CVE의 순위를 매기는 데 사용됩니다. 예를 들어 EPSS 점수 기준 95번째 백분위수의 CVE는 다른 CVE의 95%보다 악용될 가능성이 높습니다.

언급된 제품

구성 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 까지 (미포함) 4.14.310

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 4.15 까지 (미포함) 4.19.278

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 4.20 까지 (미포함) 5.4.237

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 5.5 까지 (미포함) 5.10.175

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 5.11 까지 (미포함) 5.15.103

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 5.16 까지 (미포함) 6.1.20

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 6.2 까지 (미포함) 6.2.7

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.3

참고 자료