CVE-2022-48640
12h59 +00:00
CVE 描述
bonding: fix NULL deref in bond_rr_gen_slave_id
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bonding: fix NULL deref in bond_rr_gen_slave_id Fix a NULL dereference of the struct bonding.rr_tx_counter member because if a bond is initially created with an initial mode != zero (Round Robin) the memory required for the counter is never created and when the mode is changed there is never any attempt to verify the memory is allocated upon switching modes. This causes the following Oops on an aarch64 machine: [ 334.686773] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ffff2c91ac905000 [ 334.694703] Mem abort info: [ 334.697486] ESR = 0x0000000096000004 [ 334.701234] EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits [ 334.706536] SET = 0, FnV = 0 [ 334.709579] EA = 0, S1PTW = 0 [ 334.712719] FSC = 0x04: level 0 translation fault [ 334.717586] Data abort info: [ 334.720454] ISV = 0, ISS = 0x00000004 [ 334.724288] CM = 0, WnR = 0 [ 334.727244] swapper pgtable: 4k pages, 48-bit VAs, pgdp=000008044d662000 [ 334.733944] [ffff2c91ac905000] pgd=0000000000000000, p4d=0000000000000000 [ 334.740734] Internal error: Oops: 96000004 [#1] SMP [ 334.745602] Modules linked in: bonding tls veth rfkill sunrpc arm_spe_pmu vfat fat acpi_ipmi ipmi_ssif ixgbe igb i40e mdio ipmi_devintf ipmi_msghandler arm_cmn arm_dsu_pmu cppc_cpufreq acpi_tad fuse zram crct10dif_ce ast ghash_ce sbsa_gwdt nvme drm_vram_helper drm_ttm_helper nvme_core ttm xgene_hwmon [ 334.772217] CPU: 7 PID: 2214 Comm: ping Not tainted 6.0.0-rc4-00133-g64ae13ed4784 #4 [ 334.779950] Hardware name: GIGABYTE R272-P31-00/MP32-AR1-00, BIOS F18v (SCP: 1.08.20211002) 12/01/2021 [ 334.789244] pstate: 60400009 (nZCv daif +PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) [ 334.796196] pc : bond_rr_gen_slave_id+0x40/0x124 [bonding] [ 334.801691] lr : bond_xmit_roundrobin_slave_get+0x38/0xdc [bonding] [ 334.807962] sp : ffff8000221733e0 [ 334.811265] x29: ffff8000221733e0 x28: ffffdbac8572d198 x27: ffff80002217357c [ 334.818392] x26: 000000000000002a x25: ffffdbacb33ee000 x24: ffff07ff980fa000 [ 334.825519] x23: ffffdbacb2e398ba x22: ffff07ff98102000 x21: ffff07ff981029c0 [ 334.832646] x20: 0000000000000001 x19: ffff07ff981029c0 x18: 0000000000000014 [ 334.839773] x17: 0000000000000000 x16: ffffdbacb1004364 x15: 0000aaaabe2f5a62 [ 334.846899] x14: ffff07ff8e55d968 x13: ffff07ff8e55db30 x12: 0000000000000000 [ 334.854026] x11: ffffdbacb21532e8 x10: 0000000000000001 x9 : ffffdbac857178ec [ 334.861153] x8 : ffff07ff9f6e5a28 x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : 000000007c2b3742 [ 334.868279] x5 : ffff2c91ac905000 x4 : ffff2c91ac905000 x3 : ffff07ff9f554400 [ 334.875406] x2 : ffff2c91ac905000 x1 : 0000000000000001 x0 : ffff07ff981029c0 [ 334.882532] Call trace: [ 334.884967] bond_rr_gen_slave_id+0x40/0x124 [bonding] [ 334.890109] bond_xmit_roundrobin_slave_get+0x38/0xdc [bonding] [ 334.896033] __bond_start_xmit+0x128/0x3a0 [bonding] [ 334.901001] bond_start_xmit+0x54/0xb0 [bonding] [ 334.905622] dev_hard_start_xmit+0xb4/0x220 [ 334.909798] __dev_queue_xmit+0x1a0/0x720 [ 334.913799] arp_xmit+0x3c/0xbc [ 334.916932] arp_send_dst+0x98/0xd0 [ 334.920410] arp_solicit+0xe8/0x230 [ 334.923888] neigh_probe+0x60/0xb0 [ 334.927279] __neigh_event_send+0x3b0/0x470 [ 334.931453] neigh_resolve_output+0x70/0x90 [ 334.935626] ip_finish_output2+0x158/0x514 [ 334.939714] __ip_finish_output+0xac/0x1a4 [ 334.943800] ip_finish_output+0x40/0xfc [ 334.947626] ip_output+0xf8/0x1a4 [ 334.950931] ip_send_skb+0x5c/0x100 [ 334.954410] ip_push_pending_frames+0x3c/0x60 [ 334.958758] raw_sendmsg+0x458/0x6d0 [ 334.962325] inet_sendmsg+0x50/0x80 [ 334.965805] sock_sendmsg+0x60/0x6c [ 334.969286] __sys_sendto+0xc8/0x134 [ 334.972853] __arm64_sys_sendto+0x34/0x4c ---truncated---CVE 資訊
相關弱點
| 弱點名稱 | 來源 | |
|---|---|---|
| NULL Pointer Dereference The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL. |
指標
| 指標 | 評分 | 嚴重程度 | CVSS 向量 | 來源 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 5.5 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
更多資訊
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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. |
nvd@nist.gov |
EPSS
EPSS 評分
EPSS 百分位數
相關產品
設定 0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 從（含） 5.14 至（不含） 5.15.71
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 從（含） 5.16 至（不含） 5.19.12
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.0
