CVE 설명

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: sch_teql: Introduce slaves_lock to avoid race condition and UAF The teql master->slaves singly linked list is not protected against multiple writes. It can be mod'ed concurently from teql_master_xmit(), teql_dequeue(), teql_init() and teql_destroy() without holding any list lock or RCU protection. zdi-disclosures@trendmicro.com has demonstrated that the qdisc is freed after an RCU grace period, but teql_master_xmit() running on another CPU can still hold a stale pointer into the list, resulting in a slab-use-after-free: BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in teql_master_xmit+0xf0f/0x16b0 Read of size 8 at addr ffff888013fb0440 by task poc/332 Freed 512-byte region [ffff888013fb0400, ffff888013fb0600) (kmalloc-512) The fix? Add a per-master slaves_lock spinlock that serializes all mutations of master->slaves and the NEXT_SLAVE() links in teql_destroy() and teql_qdisc_init(). teql_master_xmit() also takes the same slaves_lock around those updates. Annotate master->slaves and the per-slave ->next pointer with __rcu and use the appropriate RCU accessors everywhere they are touched: rcu_assign_pointer() on the writer side (under slaves_lock), rcu_dereference_protected() for the writer-side loads (also under slaves_lock), rcu_dereference_bh() for the loads in teql_master_xmit() and rtnl_dereference() for the loads in teql_master_open()/teql_master_mtu(), which run under RTNL. Pair this with rcu_read_lock_bh()/rcu_read_unlock_bh() around the list traversal in teql_master_xmit(), so that readers either observe a fully linked list or are deferred until the in-flight mutation completes. The two early-return paths in teql_master_xmit() are updated to release the RCU-bh read-side critical section before returning, since leaving it held would disable BH on that CPU for good.

CVE 정보

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 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. 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.	416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67