CVE-2021-47428:详情

CVE-2021-47428

5.5
/
中危
0.03%V4
2024-05-21
15h04 +00:00
Local
2025-05-04
07h10 +00:00
指定 CVE 通知
随时了解指定 CVE 的变更。
管理通知

CVE 描述

powerpc/64s: fix program check interrupt emergency stack path

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: powerpc/64s: fix program check interrupt emergency stack path Emergency stack path was jumping into a 3: label inside the __GEN_COMMON_BODY macro for the normal path after it had finished, rather than jumping over it. By a small miracle this is the correct place to build up a new interrupt frame with the existing stack pointer, so things basically worked okay with an added weird looking 700 trap frame on top (which had the wrong ->nip so it didn't decode bug messages either). Fix this by avoiding using numeric labels when jumping over non-trivial macros. Before: LE PAGE_SIZE=64K MMU=Radix SMP NR_CPUS=2048 NUMA PowerNV Modules linked in: CPU: 0 PID: 88 Comm: sh Not tainted 5.15.0-rc2-00034-ge057cdade6e5 #2637 NIP: 7265677368657265 LR: c00000000006c0c8 CTR: c0000000000097f0 REGS: c0000000fffb3a50 TRAP: 0700 Not tainted MSR: 9000000000021031 CR: 00000700 XER: 20040000 CFAR: c0000000000098b0 IRQMASK: 0 GPR00: c00000000006c964 c0000000fffb3cf0 c000000001513800 0000000000000000 GPR04: 0000000048ab0778 0000000042000000 0000000000000000 0000000000001299 GPR08: 000001e447c718ec 0000000022424282 0000000000002710 c00000000006bee8 GPR12: 9000000000009033 c0000000016b0000 00000000000000b0 0000000000000001 GPR16: 0000000000000000 0000000000000002 0000000000000000 0000000000000ff8 GPR20: 0000000000001fff 0000000000000007 0000000000000080 00007fff89d90158 GPR24: 0000000002000000 0000000002000000 0000000000000255 0000000000000300 GPR28: c000000001270000 0000000042000000 0000000048ab0778 c000000080647e80 NIP [7265677368657265] 0x7265677368657265 LR [c00000000006c0c8] ___do_page_fault+0x3f8/0xb10 Call Trace: [c0000000fffb3cf0] [c00000000000bdac] soft_nmi_common+0x13c/0x1d0 (unreliable) --- interrupt: 700 at decrementer_common_virt+0xb8/0x230 NIP: c0000000000098b8 LR: c00000000006c0c8 CTR: c0000000000097f0 REGS: c0000000fffb3d60 TRAP: 0700 Not tainted MSR: 9000000000021031 CR: 22424282 XER: 20040000 CFAR: c0000000000098b0 IRQMASK: 0 GPR00: c00000000006c964 0000000000002400 c000000001513800 0000000000000000 GPR04: 0000000048ab0778 0000000042000000 0000000000000000 0000000000001299 GPR08: 000001e447c718ec 0000000022424282 0000000000002710 c00000000006bee8 GPR12: 9000000000009033 c0000000016b0000 00000000000000b0 0000000000000001 GPR16: 0000000000000000 0000000000000002 0000000000000000 0000000000000ff8 GPR20: 0000000000001fff 0000000000000007 0000000000000080 00007fff89d90158 GPR24: 0000000002000000 0000000002000000 0000000000000255 0000000000000300 GPR28: c000000001270000 0000000042000000 0000000048ab0778 c000000080647e80 NIP [c0000000000098b8] decrementer_common_virt+0xb8/0x230 LR [c00000000006c0c8] ___do_page_fault+0x3f8/0xb10 --- interrupt: 700 Instruction dump: XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX ---[ end trace 6d28218e0cc3c949 ]--- After: ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S:491! Oops: Exception in kernel mode, sig: 5 [#1] LE PAGE_SIZE=64K MMU=Radix SMP NR_CPUS=2048 NUMA PowerNV Modules linked in: CPU: 0 PID: 88 Comm: login Not tainted 5.15.0-rc2-00034-ge057cdade6e5-dirty #2638 NIP: c0000000000098b8 LR: c00000000006bf04 CTR: c0000000000097f0 REGS: c0000000fffb3d60 TRAP: 0700 Not tainted MSR: 9000000000021031 CR: 24482227 XER: 00040000 CFAR: c0000000000098b0 IRQMASK: 0 GPR00: c00000000006bf04 0000000000002400 c000000001513800 c000000001271868 GPR04: 00000000100f0d29 0000000042000000 0000000000000007 0000000000000009 GPR08: 00000000100f0d29 0000000024482227 0000000000002710 c000000000181b3c GPR12: 9000000000009033 c0000000016b0000 00000000100f0d29 c000000005b22f00 GPR16: 00000000ffff0000 0000000000000001 0000000000000009 00000000100eed90 GPR20: 00000000100eed90 00000 ---truncated---

CVE 信息

相关弱点

CWE-ID 弱点名称 来源
CWE Other 暂无信息。

指标

指标 评分 严重程度 CVSS 向量 来源
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 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 从(含) 5.3 至(不含) 5.10.73

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 5.11 至(不含) 5.14.12

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.15

参考资料