: swapgs <+345>: xchg %ax,%ax <+347>: verw -0x1a2(%rip) <------ <+354>: sysretq ]">

CVE-2021-4440 : Detail

CVE-2021-4440

8.8
/
High
0.04%V3
Local
2024-06-25
14h20 +00:00
2024-12-19
07h31 +00:00
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

x86/xen: Drop USERGS_SYSRET64 paravirt call

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: x86/xen: Drop USERGS_SYSRET64 paravirt call commit afd30525a659ac0ae0904f0cb4a2ca75522c3123 upstream. USERGS_SYSRET64 is used to return from a syscall via SYSRET, but a Xen PV guest will nevertheless use the IRET hypercall, as there is no sysret PV hypercall defined. So instead of testing all the prerequisites for doing a sysret and then mangling the stack for Xen PV again for doing an iret just use the iret exit from the beginning. This can easily be done via an ALTERNATIVE like it is done for the sysenter compat case already. It should be noted that this drops the optimization in Xen for not restoring a few registers when returning to user mode, but it seems as if the saved instructions in the kernel more than compensate for this drop (a kernel build in a Xen PV guest was slightly faster with this patch applied). While at it remove the stale sysret32 remnants. [ pawan: Brad Spengler and Salvatore Bonaccorso reported a problem with the 5.10 backport commit edc702b4a820 ("x86/entry_64: Add VERW just before userspace transition"). When CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL=y, CLEAR_CPU_BUFFERS is not executed in syscall_return_via_sysret path as USERGS_SYSRET64 is runtime patched to: .cpu_usergs_sysret64 = { 0x0f, 0x01, 0xf8, 0x48, 0x0f, 0x07 }, // swapgs; sysretq which is missing CLEAR_CPU_BUFFERS. It turns out dropping USERGS_SYSRET64 simplifies the code, allowing CLEAR_CPU_BUFFERS to be explicitly added to syscall_return_via_sysret path. Below is with CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL=y and this patch applied: syscall_return_via_sysret: ... <+342>: swapgs <+345>: xchg %ax,%ax <+347>: verw -0x1a2(%rip) <------ <+354>: sysretq ]

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-400 Uncontrolled Resource Consumption
The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource, thereby enabling an actor to influence the amount of resources consumed, eventually leading to the exhaustion of available resources.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 8.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/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.

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.

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 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.

134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.10.215 To (excluding) 5.10.218

References