CVE-2021-47337 Detail

CVE-2021-47337

Score / Severity

5.5

Medium

CVE Descriptions

scsi: core: Fix bad pointer dereference when ehandler kthread is invalid

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: core: Fix bad pointer dereference when ehandler kthread is invalid Commit 66a834d09293 ("scsi: core: Fix error handling of scsi_host_alloc()") changed the allocation logic to call put_device() to perform host cleanup with the assumption that IDA removal and stopping the kthread would properly be performed in scsi_host_dev_release(). However, in the unlikely case that the error handler thread fails to spawn, shost->ehandler is set to ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM). The error handler cleanup code in scsi_host_dev_release() will call kthread_stop() if shost->ehandler != NULL which will always be the case whether the kthread was successfully spawned or not. In the case that it failed to spawn this has the nasty side effect of trying to dereference an invalid pointer when kthread_stop() is called. The following splat provides an example of this behavior in the wild: scsi host11: error handler thread failed to spawn, error = -4 Kernel attempted to read user page (10c) - exploit attempt? (uid: 0) BUG: Kernel NULL pointer dereference on read at 0x0000010c Faulting instruction address: 0xc00000000818e9a8 Oops: Kernel access of bad area, sig: 11 [#1] LE PAGE_SIZE=64K MMU=Hash SMP NR_CPUS=2048 NUMA pSeries Modules linked in: ibmvscsi(+) scsi_transport_srp dm_multipath dm_mirror dm_region hash dm_log dm_mod fuse overlay squashfs loop CPU: 12 PID: 274 Comm: systemd-udevd Not tainted 5.13.0-rc7 #1 NIP: c00000000818e9a8 LR: c0000000089846e8 CTR: 0000000000007ee8 REGS: c000000037d12ea0 TRAP: 0300 Not tainted (5.13.0-rc7) MSR: 800000000280b033 <SF,VEC,VSX,EE,FP,ME,IR,DR,RI,LE> CR: 28228228 XER: 20040001 CFAR: c0000000089846e4 DAR: 000000000000010c DSISR: 40000000 IRQMASK: 0 GPR00: c0000000089846e8 c000000037d13140 c000000009cc1100 fffffffffffffffc GPR04: 0000000000000001 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 c000000037dc0000 GPR08: 0000000000000000 c000000037dc0000 0000000000000001 00000000fffff7ff GPR12: 0000000000008000 c00000000a049000 c000000037d13d00 000000011134d5a0 GPR16: 0000000000001740 c0080000190d0000 c0080000190d1740 c000000009129288 GPR20: c000000037d13bc0 0000000000000001 c000000037d13bc0 c0080000190b7898 GPR24: c0080000190b7708 0000000000000000 c000000033bb2c48 0000000000000000 GPR28: c000000046b28280 0000000000000000 000000000000010c fffffffffffffffc NIP [c00000000818e9a8] kthread_stop+0x38/0x230 LR [c0000000089846e8] scsi_host_dev_release+0x98/0x160 Call Trace: [c000000033bb2c48] 0xc000000033bb2c48 (unreliable) [c0000000089846e8] scsi_host_dev_release+0x98/0x160 [c00000000891e960] device_release+0x60/0x100 [c0000000087e55c4] kobject_release+0x84/0x210 [c00000000891ec78] put_device+0x28/0x40 [c000000008984ea4] scsi_host_alloc+0x314/0x430 [c0080000190b38bc] ibmvscsi_probe+0x54/0xad0 [ibmvscsi] [c000000008110104] vio_bus_probe+0xa4/0x4b0 [c00000000892a860] really_probe+0x140/0x680 [c00000000892aefc] driver_probe_device+0x15c/0x200 [c00000000892b63c] device_driver_attach+0xcc/0xe0 [c00000000892b740] __driver_attach+0xf0/0x200 [c000000008926f28] bus_for_each_dev+0xa8/0x130 [c000000008929ce4] driver_attach+0x34/0x50 [c000000008928fc0] bus_add_driver+0x1b0/0x300 [c00000000892c798] driver_register+0x98/0x1a0 [c00000000810eb60] __vio_register_driver+0x80/0xe0 [c0080000190b4a30] ibmvscsi_module_init+0x9c/0xdc [ibmvscsi] [c0000000080121d0] do_one_initcall+0x60/0x2d0 [c000000008261abc] do_init_module+0x7c/0x320 [c000000008265700] load_module+0x2350/0x25b0 [c000000008265cb4] __do_sys_finit_module+0xd4/0x160 [c000000008031110] system_call_exception+0x150/0x2d0 [c00000000800d35c] system_call_common+0xec/0x278 Fix this be nulling shost->ehandler when the kthread fails to spawn.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID	Weakness Name	Source
CWE-476	NULL Pointer Dereference The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.

Metrics

Metrics	Score	Severity	CVSS Vector	Source
V3.1	5.5	MEDIUM	CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H More informations 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.	[email protected]

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.

EPSS First.org