CVE 설명

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: vhost_iotlb: bound map allocation in add_range vhost_iotlb_add_range_ctx() only retires an old entry when the table has a non-zero limit, has exactly reached that limit and has VHOST_IOTLB_FLAG_RETIRE set. Non-retiring tables can keep allocating entries after reaching their configured limit. Existing vhost devices allocate their IOTLB with max_iotlb_entries from vhost.c, which defaults to 2048 and is tunable by module parameter. Use the caller-provided limit at the allocation point instead of adding a separate default in the common IOTLB helper, and reject non-positive values in vhost paths that can report an error. Other vhost IOTLB users should not create zero-limit tables when entries can be populated from userspace or guest-controlled requests. Add caller-side max_iotlb_entries parameters for mlx5 vDPA, VDUSE and vhost-vDPA. Reject non-positive VDUSE and vhost-vDPA values, and require at least two entries for vdpa_sim and mlx5 vDPA paths that install full-range mappings, since those mappings are split into two IOTLB entries. Handle full-range mappings in the common helper by checking that the IOTLB can hold both split entries before inserting the first half. This avoids returning an error after leaving a half mapping behind. When the table is full, keep the existing retire behavior for retiring tables and return -ENOSPC for non-retiring tables. Reuse the retired map node instead of freeing it and allocating a replacement, so a stream of IOTLB updates cannot keep forcing GFP_ATOMIC allocations after the table has reached its limit. If a zero-limit IOTLB still reaches the common helper, treat it as a configuration error and return -EINVAL. I found this bug myself, though the patch was written with AI assistance.

CVE 정보

메트릭

메트릭	점수	심각도	CVSS 벡터	출처
V3.1	7.1	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/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. 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 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. Changed An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities. 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. 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 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