CVE 설명

nfsd: RCU-protect cl_cb_session to fix use-after-free on session teardown

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nfsd: RCU-protect cl_cb_session to fix use-after-free on session teardown After a DESTROY_SESSION the per-session teardown path can free a session while rpciod still holds an inflight callback rpc_task that dereferences clp->cl_cb_session. nfsd4_probe_callback_sync() flushes cl_callback_wq, but once nfsd4_run_cb_work() has called rpc_call_async() the rpc_task lives on rpciod; flushing the workqueue does not wait for it. rpc_shutdown_client() does drain rpciod tasks, but uses a 1-second wait_event_timeout — tasks stuck in rpc_delay() (e.g. 2-second NFS4ERR_DELAY retries) can outlive the drain. destroy path rpciod ------------ ------ unhash_session(ses) nfsd4_probe_callback_sync(clp) flush_workqueue(cl_callback_wq) /* returns; rpc_task still live */ nfsd4_put_session_locked(ses) free_session(ses) -> kfree(ses) nfsd4_cb_sequence_done() reads cb_clp->cl_cb_session /* freed slab */ A second window exists in nfsd4_process_cb_update(). When __nfsd4_find_backchannel() returns NULL because unhash_session() has already removed the destroyed session from cl_sessions, setup_callback_client() takes the v4.1 early return so clp->cl_cb_session = ses never fires and the field retains a pointer to the about-to-be-freed session. Fix both by converting cl_cb_session to an RCU-protected pointer: - Move the cl_cb_session = ses assignment in setup_callback_client() to after rpc_create() succeeds, so it is only published when a working backchannel exists. Clear cl_cb_session on the error return in nfsd4_process_cb_update(). Both stores use rcu_assign_pointer(). - Annotate cl_cb_session with __rcu. All rpciod-side readers use rcu_read_lock()/rcu_dereference() and check for NULL, bailing to the appropriate error or requeue path: encode_cb_sequence4args(), decode_cb_sequence4resok(), nfsd41_cb_get_slot(), nfsd41_cb_release_slot(), nfsd4_cb_prepare(), and nfsd4_cb_sequence_done(). - Switch __free_session() from kfree() to kfree_rcu() so the session slab is not reclaimed until after an RCU grace period, guaranteeing that rpciod readers inside rcu_read_lock() never dereference freed memory. - Pass the session pointer to the nfsd_cb_seq_status and nfsd_cb_free_slot tracepoints instead of having them re-read cl_cb_session. - nfsd4_cb_prepare() calls rpc_exit() when the session is NULL, routing through the done/release path to requeue the callback.

CVE 정보

메트릭

메트릭	점수	심각도	CVSS 벡터	출처
V3.1	9.8	CRITICAL	CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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. 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. 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. 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.