Mô tả CVE

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf, sockmap: fix integer overflow in bpf_msg_pop_data() bounds check start and len are u32, so u64 last = start + len; evaluates start + len in 32-bit and wraps before storing it in last. The bounds check if (start >= offset + l || last > msg->sg.size) return -EINVAL; can then be passed with an out-of-range start/len, after which the pop loop runs off the end of the scatterlist and sk_msg_shift_left() calls put_page() on the empty msg->sg.end slot: Oops: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0xdffffc0000000001: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000008-0x000000000000000f] RIP: 0010:sk_msg_shift_left net/core/filter.c:2957 [inline] RIP: 0010:____bpf_msg_pop_data net/core/filter.c:3103 [inline] RIP: 0010:bpf_msg_pop_data+0x753/0x1a10 net/core/filter.c:2984 Call Trace: bpf_prog_4cc92c278f4d5d56+0x1b1/0x1e8 bpf_prog_run_pin_on_cpu+0x107/0x320 include/linux/filter.h:746 sk_psock_msg_verdict+0x357/0x7f0 net/core/skmsg.c:934 tcp_bpf_send_verdict net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c:420 [inline] tcp_bpf_sendmsg+0x766/0x1ae0 net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c:583 __sock_sendmsg+0x153/0x1c0 net/socket.c:802 __sys_sendto+0x326/0x430 net/socket.c:2265 __x64_sys_sendto+0xe3/0x100 net/socket.c:2268 do_syscall_64+0x14c/0x480 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f Widen the addition with a (u64) cast so the bound is evaluated in 64-bit and a len near U32_MAX no longer wraps below msg->sg.size. While here, change pop from int to u32. It counts bytes against the unsigned scatterlist lengths and can never be negative, so the signed type only invites sign-confusion in the pop loop.

Thông tin CVE

Số liệu

Số liệu	Điểm	Mức độ nghiêm trọng	CVSS Vector	Nguồn
V3.1	8.4	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H Thêm thông tin 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. None The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack. 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