CVE 설명

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: atm: lec: fix use-after-free in sock_def_readable() A race condition exists between lec_atm_close() setting priv->lecd to NULL and concurrent access to priv->lecd in send_to_lecd(), lec_handle_bridge(), and lec_atm_send(). When the socket is freed via RCU while another thread is still using it, a use-after-free occurs in sock_def_readable() when accessing the socket's wait queue. The root cause is that lec_atm_close() clears priv->lecd without any synchronization, while callers dereference priv->lecd without any protection against concurrent teardown. Fix this by converting priv->lecd to an RCU-protected pointer: - Mark priv->lecd as __rcu in lec.h - Use rcu_assign_pointer() in lec_atm_close() and lecd_attach() for safe pointer assignment - Use rcu_access_pointer() for NULL checks that do not dereference the pointer in lec_start_xmit(), lec_push(), send_to_lecd() and lecd_attach() - Use rcu_read_lock/rcu_dereference/rcu_read_unlock in send_to_lecd(), lec_handle_bridge() and lec_atm_send() to safely access lecd - Use rcu_assign_pointer() followed by synchronize_rcu() in lec_atm_close() to ensure all readers have completed before proceeding. This is safe since lec_atm_close() is called from vcc_release() which holds lock_sock(), a sleeping lock. - Remove the manual sk_receive_queue drain from lec_atm_close() since vcc_destroy_socket() already drains it after lec_atm_close() returns. v2: Switch from spinlock + sock_hold/put approach to RCU to properly fix the race. The v1 spinlock approach had two issues pointed out by Eric Dumazet: 1. priv->lecd was still accessed directly after releasing the lock instead of using a local copy. 2. The spinlock did not prevent packets being queued after lec_atm_close() drains sk_receive_queue since timer and workqueue paths bypass netif_stop_queue(). Note: Syzbot patch testing was attempted but the test VM terminated unexpectedly with "Connection to localhost closed by remote host", likely due to a QEMU AHCI emulation issue unrelated to this fix. Compile testing with "make W=1 net/atm/lec.o" passes cleanly.

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 Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory "belongs" to the code that operates on the new pointer.

메트릭

메트릭	점수	심각도	CVSS 벡터	출처
V3.1	7	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H 추가 정보 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. 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. 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