CVE-2021-47267:详情

CVE-2021-47267

6.3
/
中危
0.09%V4
2024-05-21
14h19 +00:00
Memory Corruption
Network
2025-05-21
08h31 +00:00
指定 CVE 通知
随时了解指定 CVE 的变更。
管理通知

CVE 描述

usb: fix various gadget panics on 10gbps cabling

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: usb: fix various gadget panics on 10gbps cabling usb_assign_descriptors() is called with 5 parameters, the last 4 of which are the usb_descriptor_header for: full-speed (USB1.1 - 12Mbps [including USB1.0 low-speed @ 1.5Mbps), high-speed (USB2.0 - 480Mbps), super-speed (USB3.0 - 5Gbps), super-speed-plus (USB3.1 - 10Gbps). The differences between full/high/super-speed descriptors are usually substantial (due to changes in the maximum usb block size from 64 to 512 to 1024 bytes and other differences in the specs), while the difference between 5 and 10Gbps descriptors may be as little as nothing (in many cases the same tuning is simply good enough). However if a gadget driver calls usb_assign_descriptors() with a NULL descriptor for super-speed-plus and is then used on a max 10gbps configuration, the kernel will crash with a null pointer dereference, when a 10gbps capable device port + cable + host port combination shows up. (This wouldn't happen if the gadget max-speed was set to 5gbps, but it of course defaults to the maximum, and there's no real reason to artificially limit it) The fix is to simply use the 5gbps descriptor as the 10gbps descriptor, if a 10gbps descriptor wasn't provided. Obviously this won't fix the problem if the 5gbps descriptor is also NULL, but such cases can't be so trivially solved (and any such gadgets are unlikely to be used with USB3 ports any way).

CVE 信息

相关弱点

CWE-ID 弱点名称 来源
CWE-476 NULL Pointer Dereference
The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.

指标

指标 评分 严重程度 CVSS 向量 来源
V3.1 6.3 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L

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.

Network

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).

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.

Low

There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to 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.

Low

Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

Low

Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

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 是一种预测漏洞被利用可能性的评分模型。

EPSS 评分

EPSS 模型生成一个介于 0 到 1(即 0% 到 100%)之间的概率评分。评分越高,漏洞被利用的可能性越大。

EPSS 百分位

百分位用于根据 EPSS 评分对 CVE 进行排名。例如,EPSS 百分位为第 95 的 CVE,其被利用的可能性高于 95% 的其他 CVE。因此,百分位可用于比较不同 CVE 的 EPSS 评分。

相关产品

配置 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 至(不含) 4.9.273

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 4.10 至(不含) 4.14.237

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 4.15 至(不含) 4.19.195

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 4.20 至(不含) 5.4.126

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 5.5 至(不含) 5.10.44

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 5.11 至(不含) 5.12.11

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.13

参考资料