CVE-2021-46929
09h43 +00:00
Mô tả CVE
sctp: use call_rcu to free endpoint
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sctp: use call_rcu to free endpoint This patch is to delay the endpoint free by calling call_rcu() to fix another use-after-free issue in sctp_sock_dump(): BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in __lock_acquire+0x36d9/0x4c20 Call Trace: __lock_acquire+0x36d9/0x4c20 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3218 lock_acquire+0x1ed/0x520 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3844 __raw_spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock_api_smp.h:135 [inline] _raw_spin_lock_bh+0x31/0x40 kernel/locking/spinlock.c:168 spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock.h:334 [inline] __lock_sock+0x203/0x350 net/core/sock.c:2253 lock_sock_nested+0xfe/0x120 net/core/sock.c:2774 lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1492 [inline] sctp_sock_dump+0x122/0xb20 net/sctp/diag.c:324 sctp_for_each_transport+0x2b5/0x370 net/sctp/socket.c:5091 sctp_diag_dump+0x3ac/0x660 net/sctp/diag.c:527 __inet_diag_dump+0xa8/0x140 net/ipv4/inet_diag.c:1049 inet_diag_dump+0x9b/0x110 net/ipv4/inet_diag.c:1065 netlink_dump+0x606/0x1080 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2244 __netlink_dump_start+0x59a/0x7c0 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2352 netlink_dump_start include/linux/netlink.h:216 [inline] inet_diag_handler_cmd+0x2ce/0x3f0 net/ipv4/inet_diag.c:1170 __sock_diag_cmd net/core/sock_diag.c:232 [inline] sock_diag_rcv_msg+0x31d/0x410 net/core/sock_diag.c:263 netlink_rcv_skb+0x172/0x440 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2477 sock_diag_rcv+0x2a/0x40 net/core/sock_diag.c:274 This issue occurs when asoc is peeled off and the old sk is freed after getting it by asoc->base.sk and before calling lock_sock(sk). To prevent the sk free, as a holder of the sk, ep should be alive when calling lock_sock(). This patch uses call_rcu() and moves sock_put and ep free into sctp_endpoint_destroy_rcu(), so that it's safe to try to hold the ep under rcu_read_lock in sctp_transport_traverse_process(). If sctp_endpoint_hold() returns true, it means this ep is still alive and we have held it and can continue to dump it; If it returns false, it means this ep is dead and can be freed after rcu_read_unlock, and we should skip it. In sctp_sock_dump(), after locking the sk, if this ep is different from tsp->asoc->ep, it means during this dumping, this asoc was peeled off before calling lock_sock(), and the sk should be skipped; If this ep is the same with tsp->asoc->ep, it means no peeloff happens on this asoc, and due to lock_sock, no peeloff will happen either until release_sock. Note that delaying endpoint free won't delay the port release, as the port release happens in sctp_endpoint_destroy() before calling call_rcu(). Also, freeing endpoint by call_rcu() makes it safe to access the sk by asoc->base.sk in sctp_assocs_seq_show() and sctp_rcv(). Thanks Jones to bring this issue up. v1->v2: - improve the changelog. - add kfree(ep) into sctp_endpoint_destroy_rcu(), as Jakub noticed.Thông tin CVE
Điểm yếu liên quan
| Tên điểm yếu | Nguồn | |
|---|---|---|
| Use After Free The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory "belongs" to the code that operates on the new pointer. |
Số liệu
| Số liệu | Điểm | Mức độ nghiêm trọng | CVSS Vector | Nguồn |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 7.8 | HIGH |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Thêm thông tin
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThese 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. |
|
| V3.1 | 5.5 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Thêm thông tin
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThe 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 MetricsThese 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. |
nvd@nist.gov |
EPSS
Điểm EPSS
Phân vị EPSS
Sản phẩm được đề cập
Cấu hình 0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 4.14.0 Đến (không bao gồm) 4.14.261
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 4.15.0 Đến (không bao gồm) 4.19.224
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 4.20.0 Đến (không bao gồm) 5.4.170
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 5.5.0 Đến (không bao gồm) 5.10.90
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 5.11.0 Đến (không bao gồm) 5.15.13
