CVE-2023-53086:詳細資料

CVE-2023-53086

8.8
/
高危
0.08%V4
2025-05-02
16h15 +00:00
Adjacent
2026-10-15
22h17 +00:00
指定 CVE 通知
掌握特定 CVE 的任何變更。
管理通知

CVE 描述

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: wifi: mt76: connac: do not check WED status for non-mmio devices WED is supported just for mmio devices, so do not check it for usb or sdio devices. This patch fixes the crash reported below: [ 21.946627] wlp0s3u1i3: authenticate with c4:41:1e:f5:2b:1d [ 22.525298] wlp0s3u1i3: send auth to c4:41:1e:f5:2b:1d (try 1/3) [ 22.548274] wlp0s3u1i3: authenticate with c4:41:1e:f5:2b:1d [ 22.557694] wlp0s3u1i3: send auth to c4:41:1e:f5:2b:1d (try 1/3) [ 22.565885] wlp0s3u1i3: authenticated [ 22.569502] wlp0s3u1i3: associate with c4:41:1e:f5:2b:1d (try 1/3) [ 22.578966] wlp0s3u1i3: RX AssocResp from c4:41:1e:f5:2b:1d (capab=0x11 status=30 aid=3) [ 22.579113] wlp0s3u1i3: c4:41:1e:f5:2b:1d rejected association temporarily; comeback duration 1000 TU (1024 ms) [ 23.649518] wlp0s3u1i3: associate with c4:41:1e:f5:2b:1d (try 2/3) [ 23.752528] wlp0s3u1i3: RX AssocResp from c4:41:1e:f5:2b:1d (capab=0x11 status=0 aid=3) [ 23.797450] wlp0s3u1i3: associated [ 24.959527] kernel tried to execute NX-protected page - exploit attempt? (uid: 0) [ 24.959640] BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: ffff88800c223200 [ 24.959706] #PF: supervisor instruction fetch in kernel mode [ 24.959788] #PF: error_code(0x0011) - permissions violation [ 24.959846] PGD 2c01067 P4D 2c01067 PUD 2c02067 PMD c2a8063 PTE 800000000c223163 [ 24.959957] Oops: 0011 [#1] PREEMPT SMP [ 24.960009] CPU: 0 PID: 391 Comm: wpa_supplicant Not tainted 6.2.0-kvm #18 [ 24.960089] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.1-2.fc37 04/01/2014 [ 24.960191] RIP: 0010:0xffff88800c223200 [ 24.960446] RSP: 0018:ffffc90000ff7698 EFLAGS: 00010282 [ 24.960513] RAX: ffff888028397010 RBX: ffff88800c26e630 RCX: 0000000000000058 [ 24.960598] RDX: ffff88800c26f844 RSI: 0000000000000006 RDI: ffff888028397010 [ 24.960682] RBP: ffff88800ea72f00 R08: 18b873fbab2b964c R09: be06b38235f3c63c [ 24.960766] R10: 18b873fbab2b964c R11: be06b38235f3c63c R12: 0000000000000001 [ 24.960853] R13: ffff88800c26f84c R14: ffff8880063f0ff8 R15: ffff88800c26e644 [ 24.960950] FS: 00007effcea327c0(0000) GS:ffff88807dc00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 24.961036] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 24.961106] CR2: ffff88800c223200 CR3: 000000000eaa2000 CR4: 00000000000006b0 [ 24.961190] Call Trace: [ 24.961219] [ 24.961245] ? mt76_connac_mcu_add_key+0x2cf/0x310 [ 24.961313] ? mt7921_set_key+0x150/0x200 [ 24.961365] ? drv_set_key+0xa9/0x1b0 [ 24.961418] ? ieee80211_key_enable_hw_accel+0xd9/0x240 [ 24.961485] ? ieee80211_key_replace+0x3f3/0x730 [ 24.961541] ? crypto_shash_setkey+0x89/0xd0 [ 24.961597] ? ieee80211_key_link+0x2d7/0x3a0 [ 24.961664] ? crypto_aead_setauthsize+0x31/0x50 [ 24.961730] ? sta_info_hash_lookup+0xa6/0xf0 [ 24.961785] ? ieee80211_add_key+0x1fc/0x250 [ 24.961842] ? rdev_add_key+0x41/0x140 [ 24.961882] ? nl80211_parse_key+0x6c/0x2f0 [ 24.961940] ? nl80211_new_key+0x24a/0x290 [ 24.961984] ? genl_rcv_msg+0x36c/0x3a0 [ 24.962036] ? rdev_mod_link_station+0xe0/0xe0 [ 24.962102] ? nl80211_set_key+0x410/0x410 [ 24.962143] ? nl80211_pre_doit+0x200/0x200 [ 24.962187] ? genl_bind+0xc0/0xc0 [ 24.962217] ? netlink_rcv_skb+0xaa/0xd0 [ 24.962259] ? genl_rcv+0x24/0x40 [ 24.962300] ? netlink_unicast+0x224/0x2f0 [ 24.962345] ? netlink_sendmsg+0x30b/0x3d0 [ 24.962388] ? ____sys_sendmsg+0x109/0x1b0 [ 24.962388] ? ____sys_sendmsg+0x109/0x1b0 [ 24.962440] ? __import_iovec+0x2e/0x110 [ 24.962482] ? ___sys_sendmsg+0xbe/0xe0 [ 24.962525] ? mod_objcg_state+0x25c/0x330 [ 24.962576] ? __dentry_kill+0x19e/0x1d0 [ 24.962618] ? call_rcu+0x18f/0x270 [ 24.962660] ? __dentry_kill+0x19e/0x1d0 [ 24.962702] ? __x64_sys_sendmsg+0x70/0x90 [ 24.962744] ? do_syscall_64+0x3d/0x80 [ 24.962796] ? exit_to_user_mode_prepare+0x1b/0x70 [ 24.962852] ? entry_SYSCA ---truncated---

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 8.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.

Adjacent

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone).

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.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

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.

High

There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.

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 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.

416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
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 從(含) 6.2 至(不含) 6.2.9

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.3

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.3

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.3

參考資料