ring_feature[RING_F_FDIR].limit = count; It becomes 63. When user use xdp, "ixgbe_set_rss_queues" will set queues num. adapter->num_rx_queues = rss_i; adapter->num_tx_queues = rss_i; adapter->num_xdp_queues = ixgbe_xdp_queues(adapter); And rss_i's value is from f = &adapter->ring_feature[RING_F_FDIR]; rss_i = f->indices = f->limit; So "num_rx_queues" > "num_xdp_queues", when run to "ixgbe_xdp_setup", for (i = 0; i < adapter->num_rx_queues; i++) if (adapter->xdp_ring[i]->xsk_umem) It leads to panic. Call trace: [exception RIP: ixgbe_xdp+368] RIP: ffffffffc02a76a0 RSP: ffff9fe16202f8d0 RFLAGS: 00010297 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000020 RCX: 0000000000000000 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 000000000000001c RDI: ffffffffa94ead90 RBP: ffff92f8f24c0c18 R8: 0000000000000000 R9: 0000000000000000 R10: ffff9fe16202f830 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffff92f8f24c0000 R13: ffff9fe16202fc01 R14: 000000000000000a R15: ffffffffc02a7530 ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffffff CS: 0010 SS: 0018 7 [ffff9fe16202f8f0] dev_xdp_install at ffffffffa89fbbcc 8 [ffff9fe16202f920] dev_change_xdp_fd at ffffffffa8a08808 9 [ffff9fe16202f960] do_setlink at ffffffffa8a20235 10 [ffff9fe16202fa88] rtnl_setlink at ffffffffa8a20384 11 [ffff9fe16202fc78] rtnetlink_rcv_msg at ffffffffa8a1a8dd 12 [ffff9fe16202fcf0] netlink_rcv_skb at ffffffffa8a717eb 13 [ffff9fe16202fd40] netlink_unicast at ffffffffa8a70f88 14 [ffff9fe16202fd80] netlink_sendmsg at ffffffffa8a71319 15 [ffff9fe16202fdf0] sock_sendmsg at ffffffffa89df290 16 [ffff9fe16202fe08] __sys_sendto at ffffffffa89e19c8 17 [ffff9fe16202ff30] __x64_sys_sendto at ffffffffa89e1a64 18 [ffff9fe16202ff38] do_syscall_64 at ffffffffa84042b9 19 [ffff9fe16202ff50] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe at ffffffffa8c0008c So I fix ixgbe_max_channels so that it will not allow a setting of queues to be higher than the num_online_cpus(). And when run to ixgbe_xdp_setup, take the smaller value of num_rx_queues and num_xdp_queues.">

CVE-2021-47399 : Detail

CVE-2021-47399

5.5
/
Medium
Memory Corruption
0.04%V3
Local
2024-05-21
15h03 +00:00
2024-12-19
07h41 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

ixgbe: Fix NULL pointer dereference in ixgbe_xdp_setup

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ixgbe: Fix NULL pointer dereference in ixgbe_xdp_setup The ixgbe driver currently generates a NULL pointer dereference with some machine (online cpus < 63). This is due to the fact that the maximum value of num_xdp_queues is nr_cpu_ids. Code is in "ixgbe_set_rss_queues"". Here's how the problem repeats itself: Some machine (online cpus < 63), And user set num_queues to 63 through ethtool. Code is in the "ixgbe_set_channels", adapter->ring_feature[RING_F_FDIR].limit = count; It becomes 63. When user use xdp, "ixgbe_set_rss_queues" will set queues num. adapter->num_rx_queues = rss_i; adapter->num_tx_queues = rss_i; adapter->num_xdp_queues = ixgbe_xdp_queues(adapter); And rss_i's value is from f = &adapter->ring_feature[RING_F_FDIR]; rss_i = f->indices = f->limit; So "num_rx_queues" > "num_xdp_queues", when run to "ixgbe_xdp_setup", for (i = 0; i < adapter->num_rx_queues; i++) if (adapter->xdp_ring[i]->xsk_umem) It leads to panic. Call trace: [exception RIP: ixgbe_xdp+368] RIP: ffffffffc02a76a0 RSP: ffff9fe16202f8d0 RFLAGS: 00010297 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000020 RCX: 0000000000000000 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 000000000000001c RDI: ffffffffa94ead90 RBP: ffff92f8f24c0c18 R8: 0000000000000000 R9: 0000000000000000 R10: ffff9fe16202f830 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffff92f8f24c0000 R13: ffff9fe16202fc01 R14: 000000000000000a R15: ffffffffc02a7530 ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffffff CS: 0010 SS: 0018 7 [ffff9fe16202f8f0] dev_xdp_install at ffffffffa89fbbcc 8 [ffff9fe16202f920] dev_change_xdp_fd at ffffffffa8a08808 9 [ffff9fe16202f960] do_setlink at ffffffffa8a20235 10 [ffff9fe16202fa88] rtnl_setlink at ffffffffa8a20384 11 [ffff9fe16202fc78] rtnetlink_rcv_msg at ffffffffa8a1a8dd 12 [ffff9fe16202fcf0] netlink_rcv_skb at ffffffffa8a717eb 13 [ffff9fe16202fd40] netlink_unicast at ffffffffa8a70f88 14 [ffff9fe16202fd80] netlink_sendmsg at ffffffffa8a71319 15 [ffff9fe16202fdf0] sock_sendmsg at ffffffffa89df290 16 [ffff9fe16202fe08] __sys_sendto at ffffffffa89e19c8 17 [ffff9fe16202ff30] __x64_sys_sendto at ffffffffa89e1a64 18 [ffff9fe16202ff38] do_syscall_64 at ffffffffa84042b9 19 [ffff9fe16202ff50] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe at ffffffffa8c0008c So I fix ixgbe_max_channels so that it will not allow a setting of queues to be higher than the num_online_cpus(). And when run to ixgbe_xdp_setup, take the smaller value of num_rx_queues and num_xdp_queues.

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

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

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.0 To (excluding) 5.10.71

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.14.10

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.15

References