CVE-2022-49880:詳細資料

CVE-2022-49880

5.5
/
中危
0.03%V4
2025-05-01
14h10 +00:00
Local
2025-12-23
13h26 +00:00
指定 CVE 通知
掌握特定 CVE 的任何變更。
管理通知

CVE 描述

ext4: fix warning in 'ext4_da_release_space'

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: fix warning in 'ext4_da_release_space' Syzkaller report issue as follows: EXT4-fs (loop0): Free/Dirty block details EXT4-fs (loop0): free_blocks=0 EXT4-fs (loop0): dirty_blocks=0 EXT4-fs (loop0): Block reservation details EXT4-fs (loop0): i_reserved_data_blocks=0 EXT4-fs warning (device loop0): ext4_da_release_space:1527: ext4_da_release_space: ino 18, to_free 1 with only 0 reserved data blocks ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 92 at fs/ext4/inode.c:1528 ext4_da_release_space+0x25e/0x370 fs/ext4/inode.c:1524 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 PID: 92 Comm: kworker/u4:4 Not tainted 6.0.0-syzkaller-09423-g493ffd6605b2 #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 09/22/2022 Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn (flush-7:0) RIP: 0010:ext4_da_release_space+0x25e/0x370 fs/ext4/inode.c:1528 RSP: 0018:ffffc900015f6c90 EFLAGS: 00010296 RAX: 42215896cd52ea00 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 42215896cd52ea00 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000080000001 RDI: 0000000000000000 RBP: 1ffff1100e907d96 R08: ffffffff816aa79d R09: fffff520002bece5 R10: fffff520002bece5 R11: 1ffff920002bece4 R12: ffff888021fd2000 R13: ffff88807483ecb0 R14: 0000000000000001 R15: ffff88807483e740 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8880b9a00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00005555569ba628 CR3: 000000000c88e000 CR4: 00000000003506f0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 Call Trace: ext4_es_remove_extent+0x1ab/0x260 fs/ext4/extents_status.c:1461 mpage_release_unused_pages+0x24d/0xef0 fs/ext4/inode.c:1589 ext4_writepages+0x12eb/0x3be0 fs/ext4/inode.c:2852 do_writepages+0x3c3/0x680 mm/page-writeback.c:2469 __writeback_single_inode+0xd1/0x670 fs/fs-writeback.c:1587 writeback_sb_inodes+0xb3b/0x18f0 fs/fs-writeback.c:1870 wb_writeback+0x41f/0x7b0 fs/fs-writeback.c:2044 wb_do_writeback fs/fs-writeback.c:2187 [inline] wb_workfn+0x3cb/0xef0 fs/fs-writeback.c:2227 process_one_work+0x877/0xdb0 kernel/workqueue.c:2289 worker_thread+0xb14/0x1330 kernel/workqueue.c:2436 kthread+0x266/0x300 kernel/kthread.c:376 ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:306 Above issue may happens as follows: ext4_da_write_begin ext4_create_inline_data ext4_clear_inode_flag(inode, EXT4_INODE_EXTENTS); ext4_set_inode_flag(inode, EXT4_INODE_INLINE_DATA); __ext4_ioctl ext4_ext_migrate -> will lead to eh->eh_entries not zero, and set extent flag ext4_da_write_begin ext4_da_convert_inline_data_to_extent ext4_da_write_inline_data_begin ext4_da_map_blocks ext4_insert_delayed_block if (!ext4_es_scan_clu(inode, &ext4_es_is_delonly, lblk)) if (!ext4_es_scan_clu(inode, &ext4_es_is_mapped, lblk)) ext4_clu_mapped(inode, EXT4_B2C(sbi, lblk)); -> will return 1 allocated = true; ext4_es_insert_delayed_block(inode, lblk, allocated); ext4_writepages mpage_map_and_submit_extent(handle, &mpd, &give_up_on_write); -> return -ENOSPC mpage_release_unused_pages(&mpd, give_up_on_write); -> give_up_on_write == 1 ext4_es_remove_extent ext4_da_release_space(inode, reserved); if (unlikely(to_free > ei->i_reserved_data_blocks)) -> to_free == 1 but ei->i_reserved_data_blocks == 0 -> then trigger warning as above To solve above issue, forbid inode do migrate which has inline data.

CVE 資訊

相關弱點

CWE-ID 弱點名稱 來源
CWE Other 暫無資訊。

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

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 是一種預測漏洞被利用可能性的評分模型。

EPSS 評分

EPSS 模型產生介於 0 到 1(0% 到 100%)之間的概率分數。分數越高,漏洞被利用的概率越大。

EPSS 百分位數

百分位數用於根據 EPSS 分數對 CVE 進行排名。例如,EPSS 評分在第 95 百分位的 CVE 比 95% 的其他 CVE 更有可能被利用。因此,百分位數用於比較某 CVE 的 EPSS 分數與其他 CVE 的相對位置。

相關產品

設定 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 至(不含) 4.9.333

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 從(含) 4.10 至(不含) 4.14.299

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 從(含) 4.15 至(不含) 4.19.265

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 從(含) 4.20 至(不含) 5.4.224

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 從(含) 5.5 至(不含) 5.10.154

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 從(含) 5.11 至(不含) 5.15.78

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 從(含) 5.16 至(不含) 6.0.8

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.1

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.1

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.1

參考資料