CVE-2024-36004
09h48 +00:00
CVE 설명
i40e: Do not use WQ_MEM_RECLAIM flag for workqueue
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: i40e: Do not use WQ_MEM_RECLAIM flag for workqueue Issue reported by customer during SRIOV testing, call trace: When both i40e and the i40iw driver are loaded, a warning in check_flush_dependency is being triggered. This seems to be because of the i40e driver workqueue is allocated with the WQ_MEM_RECLAIM flag, and the i40iw one is not. Similar error was encountered on ice too and it was fixed by removing the flag. Do the same for i40e too. [Feb 9 09:08] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ +0.000004] workqueue: WQ_MEM_RECLAIM i40e:i40e_service_task [i40e] is flushing !WQ_MEM_RECLAIM infiniband:0x0 [ +0.000060] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 937 at kernel/workqueue.c:2966 check_flush_dependency+0x10b/0x120 [ +0.000007] Modules linked in: snd_seq_dummy snd_hrtimer snd_seq snd_timer snd_seq_device snd soundcore nls_utf8 cifs cifs_arc4 nls_ucs2_utils rdma_cm iw_cm ib_cm cifs_md4 dns_resolver netfs qrtr rfkill sunrpc vfat fat intel_rapl_msr intel_rapl_common irdma intel_uncore_frequency intel_uncore_frequency_common ice ipmi_ssif isst_if_common skx_edac nfit libnvdimm x86_pkg_temp_thermal intel_powerclamp gnss coretemp ib_uverbs rapl intel_cstate ib_core iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support acpi_ipmi mei_me ipmi_si intel_uncore ioatdma i2c_i801 joydev pcspkr mei ipmi_devintf lpc_ich intel_pch_thermal i2c_smbus ipmi_msghandler acpi_power_meter acpi_pad xfs libcrc32c ast sd_mod drm_shmem_helper t10_pi drm_kms_helper sg ixgbe drm i40e ahci crct10dif_pclmul libahci crc32_pclmul igb crc32c_intel libata ghash_clmulni_intel i2c_algo_bit mdio dca wmi dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log dm_mod fuse [ +0.000050] CPU: 0 PID: 937 Comm: kworker/0:3 Kdump: loaded Not tainted 6.8.0-rc2-Feb-net_dev-Qiueue-00279-gbd43c5687e05 #1 [ +0.000003] Hardware name: Intel Corporation S2600BPB/S2600BPB, BIOS SE5C620.86B.02.01.0013.121520200651 12/15/2020 [ +0.000001] Workqueue: i40e i40e_service_task [i40e] [ +0.000024] RIP: 0010:check_flush_dependency+0x10b/0x120 [ +0.000003] Code: ff 49 8b 54 24 18 48 8d 8b b0 00 00 00 49 89 e8 48 81 c6 b0 00 00 00 48 c7 c7 b0 97 fa 9f c6 05 8a cc 1f 02 01 e8 35 b3 fd ff <0f> 0b e9 10 ff ff ff 80 3d 78 cc 1f 02 00 75 94 e9 46 ff ff ff 90 [ +0.000002] RSP: 0018:ffffbd294976bcf8 EFLAGS: 00010282 [ +0.000002] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff94d4c483c000 RCX: 0000000000000027 [ +0.000001] RDX: ffff94d47f620bc8 RSI: 0000000000000001 RDI: ffff94d47f620bc0 [ +0.000001] RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000ffff7fff [ +0.000001] R10: ffffbd294976bb98 R11: ffffffffa0be65e8 R12: ffff94c5451ea180 [ +0.000001] R13: ffff94c5ab5e8000 R14: ffff94c5c20b6e05 R15: ffff94c5f1330ab0 [ +0.000001] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff94d47f600000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ +0.000002] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ +0.000001] CR2: 00007f9e6f1fca70 CR3: 0000000038e20004 CR4: 00000000007706f0 [ +0.000000] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 [ +0.000001] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 [ +0.000001] PKRU: 55555554 [ +0.000001] Call Trace: [ +0.000001]CVE 정보
관련 약점
| 약점 이름 | 출처 | |
|---|---|---|
| 정보 없음. |
메트릭
| 메트릭 | 점수 | 심각도 | CVSS 벡터 | 출처 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 부터 (포함) 4.14 까지 (미포함) 4.19.313
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 4.20 까지 (미포함) 5.4.275
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 5.5 까지 (미포함) 5.10.216
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 5.11 까지 (미포함) 5.15.158
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 5.16 까지 (미포함) 6.1.90
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 6.2 까지 (미포함) 6.6.30
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 6.7 까지 (미포함) 6.8.9
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9
구성 0
Debian>>Debian_linux >> Version 10.0
참고 자료
Tags : Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
Tags : Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
