CVE 설명

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: RDMA/rxe: Avoid reprocessing the current packet after the QP enters the error state When do_complete() finds the QP in the error state it returns RESPST_CHK_RESOURCE. Before commit 49dc9c1f0c7e ("RDMA/rxe: Cleanup reset state handling in rxe_resp.c") this was the flush loop: check_resource() had an error-state branch that fetched each remaining recv WQE and completed it with IB_WC_WR_FLUSH_ERR, without touching the current packet. That commit removed the error-state branch from check_resource() (draining is now done at rxe_receiver() entry) but kept the do_complete() error-state return. As a result, when a QP moves to the error state while a packet is being completed - e.g. an rdma_cm disconnect racing with receive processing - the responder state machine loops back into the request processing chain with the already-completed packet still in hand: check_resource() fetches a fresh recv WQE, execute()/send_data_in() copies the same packet payload again, do_complete() posts another IB_WC_SUCCESS CQE (qp->resp.status is still 0), and control returns to the error-state check. The loop re-executes the same packet once per posted recv WQE (observed: ~1000 duplicate IB_WC_SUCCESS completions of one SEND, one per ~8us, matching the RQ occupancy) until the RQ is exhausted, after which qp->resp.wqe is NULL and send_data_in() dereferences it: BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000014 Workqueue: rxe_wq do_work RIP: copy_data+0x29/0x1f0 Call Trace: send_data_in+0x25/0x50 rxe_receiver+0xf36/0x1dd0 The duplicate completions are indistinguishable from real receives to the ULP. During an rds stress test, the message was accepted as new and delivered the same datagram to user space hundreds of times, corrupting the stream; any ULP that relies on RC exactly-once delivery is affected. A live packet reaching the error-state check in do_complete() has been executed and completed exactly once and must be consumed, not re-processed. Return RESPST_CLEANUP for it (dequeue and free); keep returning RESPST_CHK_RESOURCE for the pkt == NULL case.

CVE 정보

메트릭

메트릭	점수	심각도	CVSS 벡터	출처
V3.1	8.2	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/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. 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. Low Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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