CVE 설명

crypto: algif_skcipher - force synchronous processing on trees without ctx->state

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: crypto: algif_skcipher - force synchronous processing on trees without ctx->state The AIO/async path in skcipher_recvmsg() passes the socket-wide ctx->iv directly into the skcipher request. After io_submit() the socket lock is dropped and the request is processed asynchronously, so a concurrent sendmsg(ALG_SET_IV) can overwrite ctx->iv and make the in-flight request run under an attacker-controlled IV. For CTR/stream modes this is IV/keystream reuse and lets an unprivileged user recover the plaintext of a concurrent operation. Snapshotting ctx->iv into per-request storage for the async path is not sufficient. For ciphers with statesize == 0 - which includes cbc and ctr - the MSG_MORE inter-chunk IV chaining is carried solely by the in-place req->iv writeback, which a snapshot redirects into per-request memory that af_alg_free_resources() releases on completion, silently producing wrong output. Writing the IV back from the completion callback instead is not possible either: that would require lock_sock() there, but the callback can run in softirq/atomic context, so it must not sleep. Make the operation synchronous instead, which removes both the IV race and any writeback race. This is equivalent to the upstream resolution, commit fcc77d33a34c ("net: Remove support for AIO on sockets"), which removed the AIO socket path across net/ entirely and so produces the same end state for this file. This patch deviates from that commit deliberately: rather than removing AIO socket support tree-wide, which would be far too invasive for stable, it removes only the AIO branch in crypto/algif_skcipher.c. io_submit() now completes synchronously; AF_ALG async is rarely used in practice. The -EIOCBQUEUED check in skcipher_recvmsg() is now dead but harmless, and is left alone to keep the fix minimal. Tested on 6.6.y: attacker IV injection dropped from 2296/200000 to 0/200000 after the change; MSG_MORE chunked CTR output bit-identical to single-shot.

CVE 정보

메트릭

메트릭	점수	심각도	CVSS 벡터	출처
V3.1	7.1	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N 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. None There is no impact to availability within the impacted component. 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.