CVE-2024-43876
00h06 +00:00
CVE 설명
PCI: rcar: Demote WARN() to dev_warn_ratelimited() in rcar_pcie_wakeup()
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: PCI: rcar: Demote WARN() to dev_warn_ratelimited() in rcar_pcie_wakeup() Avoid large backtrace, it is sufficient to warn the user that there has been a link problem. Either the link has failed and the system is in need of maintenance, or the link continues to work and user has been informed. The message from the warning can be looked up in the sources. This makes an actual link issue less verbose. First of all, this controller has a limitation in that the controller driver has to assist the hardware with transition to L1 link state by writing L1IATN to PMCTRL register, the L1 and L0 link state switching is not fully automatic on this controller. In case of an ASMedia ASM1062 PCIe SATA controller which does not support ASPM, on entry to suspend or during platform pm_test, the SATA controller enters D3hot state and the link enters L1 state. If the SATA controller wakes up before rcar_pcie_wakeup() was called and returns to D0, the link returns to L0 before the controller driver even started its transition to L1 link state. At this point, the SATA controller did send an PM_ENTER_L1 DLLP to the PCIe controller and the PCIe controller received it, and the PCIe controller did set PMSR PMEL1RX bit. Once rcar_pcie_wakeup() is called, if the link is already back in L0 state and PMEL1RX bit is set, the controller driver has no way to determine if it should perform the link transition to L1 state, or treat the link as if it is in L0 state. Currently the driver attempts to perform the transition to L1 link state unconditionally, which in this specific case fails with a PMSR L1FAEG poll timeout, however the link still works as it is already back in L0 state. Reduce this warning verbosity. In case the link is really broken, the rcar_pcie_config_access() would fail, otherwise it will succeed and any system with this controller and ASM1062 can suspend without generating a backtrace.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) 5.18 까지 (미포함) 6.1.103
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 6.2 까지 (미포함) 6.6.44
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 부터 (포함) 6.7 까지 (미포함) 6.10.3
