CVE-2024-46680
05h29 +00:00
Mô tả CVE
Bluetooth: btnxpuart: Fix random crash seen while removing driver
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: Bluetooth: btnxpuart: Fix random crash seen while removing driver This fixes the random kernel crash seen while removing the driver, when running the load/unload test over multiple iterations. 1) modprobe btnxpuart 2) hciconfig hci0 reset 3) hciconfig (check hci0 interface up with valid BD address) 4) modprobe -r btnxpuart Repeat steps 1 to 4 The ps_wakeup() call in btnxpuart_close() schedules the psdata->work(), which gets scheduled after module is removed, causing a kernel crash. This hidden issue got highlighted after enabling Power Save by default in 4183a7be7700 (Bluetooth: btnxpuart: Enable Power Save feature on startup) The new ps_cleanup() deasserts UART break immediately while closing serdev device, cancels any scheduled ps_work and destroys the ps_lock mutex. [ 85.884604] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ffffd4a61638f258 [ 85.884624] Mem abort info: [ 85.884625] ESR = 0x0000000086000007 [ 85.884628] EC = 0x21: IABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits [ 85.884633] SET = 0, FnV = 0 [ 85.884636] EA = 0, S1PTW = 0 [ 85.884638] FSC = 0x07: level 3 translation fault [ 85.884642] swapper pgtable: 4k pages, 48-bit VAs, pgdp=0000000041dd0000 [ 85.884646] [ffffd4a61638f258] pgd=1000000095fff003, p4d=1000000095fff003, pud=100000004823d003, pmd=100000004823e003, pte=0000000000000000 [ 85.884662] Internal error: Oops: 0000000086000007 [#1] PREEMPT SMP [ 85.890932] Modules linked in: algif_hash algif_skcipher af_alg overlay fsl_jr_uio caam_jr caamkeyblob_desc caamhash_desc caamalg_desc crypto_engine authenc libdes crct10dif_ce polyval_ce polyval_generic snd_soc_imx_spdif snd_soc_imx_card snd_soc_ak5558 snd_soc_ak4458 caam secvio error snd_soc_fsl_spdif snd_soc_fsl_micfil snd_soc_fsl_sai snd_soc_fsl_utils gpio_ir_recv rc_core fuse [last unloaded: btnxpuart(O)] [ 85.927297] CPU: 1 PID: 67 Comm: kworker/1:3 Tainted: G O 6.1.36+g937b1be4345a #1 [ 85.936176] Hardware name: FSL i.MX8MM EVK board (DT) [ 85.936182] Workqueue: events 0xffffd4a61638f380 [ 85.936198] pstate: 60000005 (nZCv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) [ 85.952817] pc : 0xffffd4a61638f258 [ 85.952823] lr : 0xffffd4a61638f258 [ 85.952827] sp : ffff8000084fbd70 [ 85.952829] x29: ffff8000084fbd70 x28: 0000000000000000 x27: 0000000000000000 [ 85.963112] x26: ffffd4a69133f000 x25: ffff4bf1c8540990 x24: ffff4bf215b87305 [ 85.963119] x23: ffff4bf215b87300 x22: ffff4bf1c85409d0 x21: ffff4bf1c8540970 [ 85.977382] x20: 0000000000000000 x19: ffff4bf1c8540880 x18: 0000000000000000 [ 85.977391] x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000133 x15: 0000ffffe2217090 [ 85.977399] x14: 0000000000000001 x13: 0000000000000133 x12: 0000000000000139 [ 85.977407] x11: 0000000000000001 x10: 0000000000000a60 x9 : ffff8000084fbc50 [ 85.977417] x8 : ffff4bf215b7d000 x7 : ffff4bf215b83b40 x6 : 00000000000003e8 [ 85.977424] x5 : 00000000410fd030 x4 : 0000000000000000 x3 : 0000000000000000 [ 85.977432] x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : ffff4bf1c4265880 x0 : 0000000000000000 [ 85.977443] Call trace: [ 85.977446] 0xffffd4a61638f258 [ 85.977451] 0xffffd4a61638f3e8 [ 85.977455] process_one_work+0x1d4/0x330 [ 85.977464] worker_thread+0x6c/0x430 [ 85.977471] kthread+0x108/0x10c [ 85.977476] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 [ 85.977488] Code: bad PC value [ 85.977491] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- Preset since v6.9.11Thông tin CVE
Điểm yếu liên quan
| Tên điểm yếu | Nguồn | |
|---|---|---|
| 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
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) 6.4 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.6.49
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version Từ (bao gồm) 6.7 Đến (không bao gồm) 6.10.8
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.11
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.11
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.11
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.11
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.11
