CVE-2023-52474 : Chi tiết

CVE-2023-52474

7.8
/
Cao
0.02%V4
2024-02-26
18h15 +00:00
Local
2026-08-04
10h18 +00:00
Thông báo cho một CVE
Luôn được thông báo về mọi thay đổi đối với một CVE cụ thể.
Quản lý thông báo

Mô tả CVE

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: IB/hfi1: Fix bugs with non-PAGE_SIZE-end multi-iovec user SDMA requests hfi1 user SDMA request processing has two bugs that can cause data corruption for user SDMA requests that have multiple payload iovecs where an iovec other than the tail iovec does not run up to the page boundary for the buffer pointed to by that iovec.a Here are the specific bugs: 1. user_sdma_txadd() does not use struct user_sdma_iovec->iov.iov_len. Rather, user_sdma_txadd() will add up to PAGE_SIZE bytes from iovec to the packet, even if some of those bytes are past iovec->iov.iov_len and are thus not intended to be in the packet. 2. user_sdma_txadd() and user_sdma_send_pkts() fail to advance to the next iovec in user_sdma_request->iovs when the current iovec is not PAGE_SIZE and does not contain enough data to complete the packet. The transmitted packet will contain the wrong data from the iovec pages. This has not been an issue with SDMA packets from hfi1 Verbs or PSM2 because they only produce iovecs that end short of PAGE_SIZE as the tail iovec of an SDMA request. Fixing these bugs exposes other bugs with the SDMA pin cache (struct mmu_rb_handler) that get in way of supporting user SDMA requests with multiple payload iovecs whose buffers do not end at PAGE_SIZE. So this commit fixes those issues as well. Here are the mmu_rb_handler bugs that non-PAGE_SIZE-end multi-iovec payload user SDMA requests can hit: 1. Overlapping memory ranges in mmu_rb_handler will result in duplicate pinnings. 2. When extending an existing mmu_rb_handler entry (struct mmu_rb_node), the mmu_rb code (1) removes the existing entry under a lock, (2) releases that lock, pins the new pages, (3) then reacquires the lock to insert the extended mmu_rb_node. If someone else comes in and inserts an overlapping entry between (2) and (3), insert in (3) will fail. The failure path code in this case unpins _all_ pages in either the original mmu_rb_node or the new mmu_rb_node that was inserted between (2) and (3). 3. In hfi1_mmu_rb_remove_unless_exact(), mmu_rb_node->refcount is incremented outside of mmu_rb_handler->lock. As a result, mmu_rb_node could be evicted by another thread that gets mmu_rb_handler->lock and checks mmu_rb_node->refcount before mmu_rb_node->refcount is incremented. 4. Related to #2 above, SDMA request submission failure path does not check mmu_rb_node->refcount before freeing mmu_rb_node object. If there are other SDMA requests in progress whose iovecs have pointers to the now-freed mmu_rb_node(s), those pointers to the now-freed mmu_rb nodes will be dereferenced when those SDMA requests complete.

Thông tin CVE

Điểm yếu liên quan

CWE-ID Tên điểm yếu Nguồn
CWE Other Không có thông tin.

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

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.

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 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
V3.1 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

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.

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 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.

nvd@nist.gov

EPSS

EPSS là mô hình tính điểm dự đoán khả năng một lỗ hổng bị khai thác.

Điểm EPSS

Mô hình EPSS tạo ra điểm xác suất từ 0 đến 1 (0 đến 100%). Điểm càng cao, xác suất một lỗ hổng bị khai thác càng lớn.

Phân vị EPSS

Phân vị được dùng để xếp hạng CVE theo điểm EPSS. Ví dụ, một CVE ở phân vị thứ 95 theo điểm EPSS có nhiều khả năng bị khai thác hơn 95% CVE khác. Do đó, phân vị được dùng để so sánh điểm EPSS của một CVE với các CVE khác.

Sản phẩm được đề cập

Cấu hình 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 4.3.0 Đến (không bao gồm) 5.10.180

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 5.11.0 Đến (không bao gồm) 5.15.111

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 5.16.0 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.1.28

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 6.2.0 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.2.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 6.3.0 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.3.2

Tài liệu tham khảo