CVE-2024-38636 : Chi tiết

CVE-2024-38636

5.5
/
Trung bình
0.03%V4
2024-06-21
10h18 +00:00
Local
2025-05-04
09h15 +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

f2fs: multidev: fix to recognize valid zero block address

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: f2fs: multidev: fix to recognize valid zero block address As reported by Yi Zhang in mailing list [1], kernel warning was catched during zbd/010 test as below: ./check zbd/010 zbd/010 (test gap zone support with F2FS) [failed] runtime ... 3.752s something found in dmesg: [ 4378.146781] run blktests zbd/010 at 2024-02-18 11:31:13 [ 4378.192349] null_blk: module loaded [ 4378.209860] null_blk: disk nullb0 created [ 4378.413285] scsi_debug:sdebug_driver_probe: scsi_debug: trim poll_queues to 0. poll_q/nr_hw = (0/1) [ 4378.422334] scsi host15: scsi_debug: version 0191 [20210520] dev_size_mb=1024, opts=0x0, submit_queues=1, statistics=0 [ 4378.434922] scsi 15:0:0:0: Direct-Access-ZBC Linux scsi_debug 0191 PQ: 0 ANSI: 7 [ 4378.443343] scsi 15:0:0:0: Power-on or device reset occurred [ 4378.449371] sd 15:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg5 type 20 [ 4378.449418] sd 15:0:0:0: [sdf] Host-managed zoned block device ... (See '/mnt/tests/gitlab.com/api/v4/projects/19168116/repository/archive.zip/storage/blktests/blk/blktests/results/nodev/zbd/010.dmesg' WARNING: CPU: 22 PID: 44011 at fs/iomap/iter.c:51 CPU: 22 PID: 44011 Comm: fio Not tainted 6.8.0-rc3+ #1 RIP: 0010:iomap_iter+0x32b/0x350 Call Trace: __iomap_dio_rw+0x1df/0x830 f2fs_file_read_iter+0x156/0x3d0 [f2fs] aio_read+0x138/0x210 io_submit_one+0x188/0x8c0 __x64_sys_io_submit+0x8c/0x1a0 do_syscall_64+0x86/0x170 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6e/0x76 Shinichiro Kawasaki helps to analyse this issue and proposes a potential fixing patch in [2]. Quoted from reply of Shinichiro Kawasaki: "I confirmed that the trigger commit is dbf8e63f48af as Yi reported. I took a look in the commit, but it looks fine to me. So I thought the cause is not in the commit diff. I found the WARN is printed when the f2fs is set up with multiple devices, and read requests are mapped to the very first block of the second device in the direct read path. In this case, f2fs_map_blocks() and f2fs_map_blocks_cached() modify map->m_pblk as the physical block address from each block device. It becomes zero when it is mapped to the first block of the device. However, f2fs_iomap_begin() assumes that map->m_pblk is the physical block address of the whole f2fs, across the all block devices. It compares map->m_pblk against NULL_ADDR == 0, then go into the unexpected branch and sets the invalid iomap->length. The WARN catches the invalid iomap->length. This WARN is printed even for non-zoned block devices, by following steps. - Create two (non-zoned) null_blk devices memory backed with 128MB size each: nullb0 and nullb1. # mkfs.f2fs /dev/nullb0 -c /dev/nullb1 # mount -t f2fs /dev/nullb0 "${mount_dir}" # dd if=/dev/zero of="${mount_dir}/test.dat" bs=1M count=192 # dd if="${mount_dir}/test.dat" of=/dev/null bs=1M count=192 iflag=direct ..." So, the root cause of this issue is: when multi-devices feature is on, f2fs_map_blocks() may return zero blkaddr in non-primary device, which is a verified valid block address, however, f2fs_iomap_begin() treats it as an invalid block address, and then it triggers the warning in iomap framework code. Finally, as discussed, we decide to use a more simple and direct way that checking (map.m_flags & F2FS_MAP_MAPPED) condition instead of (map.m_pblk != NULL_ADDR) to fix this issue. Thanks a lot for the effort of Yi Zhang and Shinichiro Kawasaki on this issue. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-f2fs-devel/CAHj4cs-kfojYC9i0G73PRkYzcxCTex=-vugRFeP40g_URGvnfQ@mail.gmail.com/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-f2fs-devel/gngdj77k4picagsfdtiaa7gpgnup6fsgwzsltx6milmhegmjff@iax2n4wvrqye/

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

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) 5.17 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.1.93

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 6.2 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.6.33

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 6.7 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.9.4

Tài liệu tham khảo