CVE-2023-53252 : 상세 정보

CVE-2023-53252

7.8
/
높음
0.02%V4
2025-09-15
15h15 +00:00
Memory Corruption
Local
2026-01-14
18h16 +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: Bluetooth: use RCU for hci_conn_params and iterate safely in hci_sync hci_update_accept_list_sync iterates over hdev->pend_le_conns and hdev->pend_le_reports, and waits for controller events in the loop body, without holding hdev lock. Meanwhile, these lists and the items may be modified e.g. by le_scan_cleanup. This can invalidate the list cursor or any other item in the list, resulting to invalid behavior (eg use-after-free). Use RCU for the hci_conn_params action lists. Since the loop bodies in hci_sync block and we cannot use RCU or hdev->lock for the whole loop, copy list items first and then iterate on the copy. Only the flags field is written from elsewhere, so READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE should guarantee we read valid values. Free params everywhere with hci_conn_params_free so the cleanup is guaranteed to be done properly. This fixes the following, which can be triggered e.g. by BlueZ new mgmt-tester case "Add + Remove Device Nowait - Success", or by changing hci_le_set_cig_params to always return false, and running iso-tester: ================================================================== BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in hci_update_passive_scan_sync (net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2536 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2723 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2841) Read of size 8 at addr ffff888001265018 by task kworker/u3:0/32 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.2-1.fc38 04/01/2014 Workqueue: hci0 hci_cmd_sync_work Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl (./arch/x86/include/asm/irqflags.h:134 lib/dump_stack.c:107) print_report (mm/kasan/report.c:320 mm/kasan/report.c:430) ? __virt_addr_valid (./include/linux/mmzone.h:1915 ./include/linux/mmzone.h:2011 arch/x86/mm/physaddr.c:65) ? hci_update_passive_scan_sync (net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2536 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2723 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2841) kasan_report (mm/kasan/report.c:538) ? hci_update_passive_scan_sync (net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2536 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2723 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2841) hci_update_passive_scan_sync (net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2536 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2723 net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2841) ? __pfx_hci_update_passive_scan_sync (net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2780) ? mutex_lock (kernel/locking/mutex.c:282) ? __pfx_mutex_lock (kernel/locking/mutex.c:282) ? __pfx_mutex_unlock (kernel/locking/mutex.c:538) ? __pfx_update_passive_scan_sync (net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:2861) hci_cmd_sync_work (net/bluetooth/hci_sync.c:306) process_one_work (./arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h:27 kernel/workqueue.c:2399) worker_thread (./include/linux/list.h:292 kernel/workqueue.c:2538) ? __pfx_worker_thread (kernel/workqueue.c:2480) kthread (kernel/kthread.c:376) ? __pfx_kthread (kernel/kthread.c:331) ret_from_fork (arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:314) Allocated by task 31: kasan_save_stack (mm/kasan/common.c:46) kasan_set_track (mm/kasan/common.c:52) __kasan_kmalloc (mm/kasan/common.c:374 mm/kasan/common.c:383) hci_conn_params_add (./include/linux/slab.h:580 ./include/linux/slab.h:720 net/bluetooth/hci_core.c:2277) hci_connect_le_scan (net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c:1419 net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c:1589) hci_connect_cis (net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c:2266) iso_connect_cis (net/bluetooth/iso.c:390) iso_sock_connect (net/bluetooth/iso.c:899) __sys_connect (net/socket.c:2003 net/socket.c:2020) __x64_sys_connect (net/socket.c:2027) do_syscall_64 (arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80) entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe (arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:120) Freed by task 15: kasan_save_stack (mm/kasan/common.c:46) kasan_set_track (mm/kasan/common.c:52) kasan_save_free_info (mm/kasan/generic.c:523) __kasan_slab_free (mm/kasan/common.c:238 mm/kasan/common.c:200 mm/kasan/common.c:244) __kmem_cache_free (mm/slub.c:1807 mm/slub.c:3787 mm/slub.c:3800) hci_conn_params_del (net/bluetooth/hci_core.c:2323) le_scan_cleanup (net/bluetooth/hci_conn.c:202) process_one_work (./arch/x86/include/asm/preempt. ---truncated---

CVE 정보

관련 약점

CWE-ID 약점 이름 출처
CWE-416 Use After Free
The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory "belongs" to the code that operates on the new pointer.
CWE-416 Use After Free
The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory "belongs" to the code that operates on the new pointer.

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.

nvd@nist.gov
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.

134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

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 부터 (포함) 5.17 까지 (미포함) 6.1.42

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 6.2 까지 (미포함) 6.4.7

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.5

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.5

참고 자료