CVE-2022-23005
00h00 +00:00
CVE 描述
Host Boot ROM Code Vulnerability in Systems Implementing UFS Boot Feature
Western Digital has identified a weakness in the UFS standard that could result in a security vulnerability. This vulnerability may exist in some systems where the Host boot ROM code implements the UFS Boot feature to boot from UFS compliant storage devices. The UFS Boot feature, as specified in the UFS standard, is provided by UFS devices to support platforms that need to download the system boot loader from external non-volatile storage locations. Several scenarios have been identified in which adversaries may disable the boot capability, or revert to an old boot loader code, if the host boot ROM code is improperly implemented. UFS Host Boot ROM implementers may be impacted by this vulnerability. UFS devices are only impacted when connected to a vulnerable UFS Host and are not independently impacted by this vulnerability. When present, the vulnerability is in the UFS Host implementation and is not a vulnerability in Western Digital UFS Devices. Western Digital has provided details of the vulnerability to the JEDEC standards body, multiple vendors of host processors, and software solutions providers.CVE 信息
相关弱点
| 弱点名称 | 来源 | |
|---|---|---|
| Improper Restriction of Write-Once Bit Fields The hardware design control register "sticky bits" or write-once bit fields are improperly implemented, such that they can be reprogrammed by software. |
||
| Security-Sensitive Hardware Controls with Missing Lock Bit Protection The product uses a register lock bit protection mechanism, but it does not ensure that the lock bit prevents modification of system registers or controls that perform changes to important hardware system configuration. |
||
| Improper Access Control for Register Interface The product uses memory-mapped I/O registers that act as an interface to hardware functionality from software, but there is improper access control to those registers. |
||
| Improper Synchronization The product utilizes multiple threads, processes, components, or systems to allow temporary access to a shared resource that can only be exclusive to one process at a time, but it does not properly synchronize these actions, which might cause simultaneous accesses of this resource by multiple threads or processes. |
指标
| 指标 | 评分 | 严重程度 | CVSS 向量 | 来源 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 8.7 | HIGH |
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
更多信息
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. 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. High The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component allowing access to component-wide settings and files. 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. Changed An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities. 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. 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. |
EPSS
EPSS 评分
EPSS 百分位
相关产品
配置 0
Jedec>>Universal_flash_storage >> Version -
Westerndigital>>Inand_eu311_mobile_mc_ufs >> Version -
Westerndigital>>Inand_eu312_automotive_xa_at_ufs >> Version -
Westerndigital>>Inand_eu312_industrial_ix_ufs >> Version -
参考资料
Tags : Vendor Advisory
Tags : Exploit, Technical Description, Vendor Advisory
