CVE-2023-53601:详情

CVE-2023-53601

5.5
/
中危
0.02%V4
2025-10-04
16h15 +00:00
Local
2026-11-05
21h17 +00:00
指定 CVE 通知
随时了解指定 CVE 的变更。
管理通知

CVE 描述

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bonding: do not assume skb mac_header is set Drivers must not assume in their ndo_start_xmit() that skbs have their mac_header set. skb->data is all what is needed. bonding seems to be one of the last offender as caught by syzbot: WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 12155 at include/linux/skbuff.h:2907 skb_mac_offset include/linux/skbuff.h:2913 [inline] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 12155 at include/linux/skbuff.h:2907 bond_xmit_hash drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:4170 [inline] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 12155 at include/linux/skbuff.h:2907 bond_xmit_3ad_xor_slave_get drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:5149 [inline] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 12155 at include/linux/skbuff.h:2907 bond_3ad_xor_xmit drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:5186 [inline] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 12155 at include/linux/skbuff.h:2907 __bond_start_xmit drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:5442 [inline] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 12155 at include/linux/skbuff.h:2907 bond_start_xmit+0x14ab/0x19d0 drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:5470 Modules linked in: CPU: 1 PID: 12155 Comm: syz-executor.3 Not tainted 6.1.30-syzkaller #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 05/25/2023 RIP: 0010:skb_mac_header include/linux/skbuff.h:2907 [inline] RIP: 0010:skb_mac_offset include/linux/skbuff.h:2913 [inline] RIP: 0010:bond_xmit_hash drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:4170 [inline] RIP: 0010:bond_xmit_3ad_xor_slave_get drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:5149 [inline] RIP: 0010:bond_3ad_xor_xmit drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:5186 [inline] RIP: 0010:__bond_start_xmit drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:5442 [inline] RIP: 0010:bond_start_xmit+0x14ab/0x19d0 drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:5470 Code: 8b 7c 24 30 e8 76 dd 1a 01 48 85 c0 74 0d 48 89 c3 e8 29 67 2e fe e9 15 ef ff ff e8 1f 67 2e fe e9 10 ef ff ff e8 15 67 2e fe <0f> 0b e9 45 f8 ff ff e8 09 67 2e fe e9 dc fa ff ff e8 ff 66 2e fe RSP: 0018:ffffc90002fff6e0 EFLAGS: 00010283 RAX: ffffffff835874db RBX: 000000000000ffff RCX: 0000000000040000 RDX: ffffc90004dcf000 RSI: 00000000000000b5 RDI: 00000000000000b6 RBP: ffffc90002fff8b8 R08: ffffffff83586d16 R09: ffffffff83586584 R10: 0000000000000007 R11: ffff8881599fc780 R12: ffff88811b6a7b7e R13: 1ffff110236d4f6f R14: ffff88811b6a7ac0 R15: 1ffff110236d4f76 FS: 00007f2e9eb47700(0000) GS:ffff8881f6b00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000001b2e421000 CR3: 000000010e6d4000 CR4: 00000000003526e0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 Call Trace: [] netdev_start_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:4925 [inline] [] __dev_direct_xmit+0x4ef/0x850 net/core/dev.c:4380 [] dev_direct_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:3043 [inline] [] packet_direct_xmit+0x18b/0x300 net/packet/af_packet.c:284 [] packet_snd net/packet/af_packet.c:3112 [inline] [] packet_sendmsg+0x4a22/0x64d0 net/packet/af_packet.c:3143 [] sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:716 [inline] [] sock_sendmsg net/socket.c:736 [inline] [] __sys_sendto+0x472/0x5f0 net/socket.c:2139 [] __do_sys_sendto net/socket.c:2151 [inline] [] __se_sys_sendto net/socket.c:2147 [inline] [] __x64_sys_sendto+0xe5/0x100 net/socket.c:2147 [] do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline] [] do_syscall_64+0x2f/0x50 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80 [] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd

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) 5.12 至(不含) 5.15.121

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 5.16 至(不含) 6.1.39

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 6.2 至(不含) 6.3.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从(含) 6.4 至(不含) 6.4.4

参考资料