CVE-2025-40186
21h56 +00:00
CVE 설명
tcp: Don't call reqsk_fastopen_remove() in tcp_conn_request().
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tcp: Don't call reqsk_fastopen_remove() in tcp_conn_request(). syzbot reported the splat below in tcp_conn_request(). [0] If a listener is close()d while a TFO socket is being processed in tcp_conn_request(), inet_csk_reqsk_queue_add() does not set reqsk->sk and calls inet_child_forget(), which calls tcp_disconnect() for the TFO socket. After the cited commit, tcp_disconnect() calls reqsk_fastopen_remove(), where reqsk_put() is called due to !reqsk->sk. Then, reqsk_fastopen_remove() in tcp_conn_request() decrements the last req->rsk_refcnt and frees reqsk, and __reqsk_free() at the drop_and_free label causes the refcount underflow for the listener and double-free of the reqsk. Let's remove reqsk_fastopen_remove() in tcp_conn_request(). Note that other callers make sure tp->fastopen_rsk is not NULL. [0]: refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free. WARNING: CPU: 12 PID: 5563 at lib/refcount.c:28 refcount_warn_saturate (lib/refcount.c:28) Modules linked in: CPU: 12 UID: 0 PID: 5563 Comm: syz-executor Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 07/12/2025 RIP: 0010:refcount_warn_saturate (lib/refcount.c:28) Code: ab e8 8e b4 98 ff 0f 0b c3 cc cc cc cc cc 80 3d a4 e4 d6 01 00 75 9c c6 05 9b e4 d6 01 01 48 c7 c7 e8 df fb ab e8 6a b4 98 ff <0f> 0b e9 03 5b 76 00 cc 80 3d 7d e4 d6 01 00 0f 85 74 ff ff ff c6 RSP: 0018:ffffa79fc0304a98 EFLAGS: 00010246 RAX: d83af4db1c6b3900 RBX: ffff9f65c7a69020 RCX: d83af4db1c6b3900 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 00000000ffff7fff RDI: ffffffffac78a280 RBP: 000000009d781b60 R08: 0000000000007fff R09: ffffffffac6ca280 R10: 0000000000017ffd R11: 0000000000000004 R12: ffff9f65c7b4f100 R13: ffff9f65c7d23c00 R14: ffff9f65c7d26000 R15: ffff9f65c7a64ef8 FS: 00007f9f962176c0(0000) GS:ffff9f65fcf00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000200000000180 CR3: 000000000dbbe006 CR4: 0000000000372ef0 Call Trace:CVE 정보
메트릭
| 메트릭 | 점수 | 심각도 | CVSS 벡터 | 출처 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 8.1 | HIGH |
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/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. Network The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers). Attack Complexity This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. High successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. None The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack. 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. |
