CVE 설명

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: svcrdma: Fix unmatched rn_unregister on failed accept When svc_rdma_accept() takes the errout path before rpcrdma_rn_register() has succeeded, the existing cleanup block calls rpcrdma_rn_unregister(dev, &newxprt->sc_rn) unconditionally. svcxprt_rdma is kzalloc'd, so on that path sc_rn.rn_index is 0 and sc_rn.rn_done is NULL; the unregister therefore xa_erase()s another caller's slot 0 and performs an unmatched kref_put() on the rpcrdma_device's rd_kref. The same errout also brackets the cleanup with svc_xprt_get()/ svc_xprt_put() around the kref_init() birth reference. The kref goes 1 -> 2 -> 1 and never reaches 0, so the svcxprt_rdma (and the net/ns_tracker it pinned) is leaked on every failed accept. rpcrdma_rn_register() writes rn->rn_done last, only after xa_alloc() and kref_get() have both succeeded, so rn_done == NULL is a natural "never registered" sentinel. Guard rpcrdma_rn_unregister() with an early return when rn_done is NULL, and clear rn_done before the matching xa_erase() so a repeated unregister is also a no-op. With that guard in place, the accept errout drops the kref_init() birth reference via svc_xprt_put(), which dispatches svc_rdma_free(). Teardown of sc_qp, sc_sq_cq, sc_rq_cq, and sc_pd runs under existing IS_ERR/NULL guards in svc_rdma_free(); sc_rn is covered by the new rn_done sentinel; sc_cm_id is non-NULL on every errout path because svc_rdma_accept() dereferences it above the first goto errout. svc_xprt_free() drops the module reference associated with the freed transport, and svc_handle_xprt() drops its pre-acquired reference when ->xpo_accept() returns NULL. Take a replacement module reference before svc_xprt_put() so the two module_put()s remain balanced. The rn_done guard also covers svc_rdma_free()'s non-listener call to rpcrdma_rn_unregister() for transports whose register attempt failed or never ran.

CVE 정보

메트릭

메트릭	점수	심각도	CVSS 벡터	출처
V3.1	8.1	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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. High successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. 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.	416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67