CVE-2023-53243 : Chi tiết

CVE-2023-53243

5.5
/
Trung bình
0.02%V4
2025-09-15
15h15 +00:00
Local
2026-01-14
18h16 +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: btrfs: add handling for RAID1C23/DUP to btrfs_reduce_alloc_profile Callers of `btrfs_reduce_alloc_profile` expect it to return exactly one allocation profile flag, and failing to do so may ultimately result in a WARN_ON and remount-ro when allocating new blocks, like the below transaction abort on 6.1. `btrfs_reduce_alloc_profile` has two ways of determining the profile, first it checks if a conversion balance is currently running and uses the profile we're converting to. If no balance is currently running, it returns the max-redundancy profile which at least one block in the selected block group has. This works by simply checking each known allocation profile bit in redundancy order. However, `btrfs_reduce_alloc_profile` has not been updated as new flags have been added - first with the `DUP` profile and later with the RAID1C34 profiles. Because of the way it checks, if we have blocks with different profiles and at least one is known, that profile will be selected. However, if none are known we may return a flag set with multiple allocation profiles set. This is currently only possible when a balance from one of the three unhandled profiles to another of the unhandled profiles is canceled after allocating at least one block using the new profile. In that case, a transaction abort like the below will occur and the filesystem will need to be mounted with -o skip_balance to get it mounted rw again (but the balance cannot be resumed without a similar abort). [770.648] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [770.648] BTRFS: Transaction aborted (error -22) [770.648] WARNING: CPU: 43 PID: 1159593 at fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:4122 find_free_extent+0x1d94/0x1e00 [btrfs] [770.648] CPU: 43 PID: 1159593 Comm: btrfs Tainted: G W 6.1.0-0.deb11.7-powerpc64le #1 Debian 6.1.20-2~bpo11+1a~test [770.648] Hardware name: T2P9D01 REV 1.00 POWER9 0x4e1202 opal:skiboot-bc106a0 PowerNV [770.648] NIP: c00800000f6784fc LR: c00800000f6784f8 CTR: c000000000d746c0 [770.648] REGS: c000200089afe9a0 TRAP: 0700 Tainted: G W (6.1.0-0.deb11.7-powerpc64le Debian 6.1.20-2~bpo11+1a~test) [770.648] MSR: 9000000002029033 CR: 28848282 XER: 20040000 [770.648] CFAR: c000000000135110 IRQMASK: 0 GPR00: c00800000f6784f8 c000200089afec40 c00800000f7ea800 0000000000000026 GPR04: 00000001004820c2 c000200089afea00 c000200089afe9f8 0000000000000027 GPR08: c000200ffbfe7f98 c000000002127f90 ffffffffffffffd8 0000000026d6a6e8 GPR12: 0000000028848282 c000200fff7f3800 5deadbeef0000122 c00000002269d000 GPR16: c0002008c7797c40 c000200089afef17 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 GPR20: 0000000000000000 0000000000000001 c000200008bc5a98 0000000000000001 GPR24: 0000000000000000 c0000003c73088d0 c000200089afef17 c000000016d3a800 GPR28: c0000003c7308800 c00000002269d000 ffffffffffffffea 0000000000000001 [770.648] NIP [c00800000f6784fc] find_free_extent+0x1d94/0x1e00 [btrfs] [770.648] LR [c00800000f6784f8] find_free_extent+0x1d90/0x1e00 [btrfs] [770.648] Call Trace: [770.648] [c000200089afec40] [c00800000f6784f8] find_free_extent+0x1d90/0x1e00 [btrfs] (unreliable) [770.648] [c000200089afed30] [c00800000f681398] btrfs_reserve_extent+0x1a0/0x2f0 [btrfs] [770.648] [c000200089afeea0] [c00800000f681bf0] btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0x108/0x670 [btrfs] [770.648] [c000200089afeff0] [c00800000f66bd68] __btrfs_cow_block+0x170/0x850 [btrfs] [770.648] [c000200089aff100] [c00800000f66c58c] btrfs_cow_block+0x144/0x288 [btrfs] [770.648] [c000200089aff1b0] [c00800000f67113c] btrfs_search_slot+0x6b4/0xcb0 [btrfs] [770.648] [c000200089aff2a0] [c00800000f679f60] lookup_inline_extent_backref+0x128/0x7c0 [btrfs] [770.648] [c000200089aff3b0] [c00800000f67b338] lookup_extent_backref+0x70/0x190 [btrfs] [770.648] [c000200089aff470] [c00800000f67b54c] __btrfs_free_extent+0xf4/0x1490 [btrfs] [770.648] [ ---truncated---

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 5.5 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.

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 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
V3.1 5.5 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.

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 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.

134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

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) 5.5 Đến (không bao gồm) 5.10.188

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 5.11 Đến (không bao gồm) 5.15.121

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 5.16 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.1.39

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 6.2 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.4.4

Tài liệu tham khảo