CVE-2021-47619 : Detail

CVE-2021-47619

5.5
/
Medium
Memory Corruption
0.04%V3
Local
2024-06-20
11h08 +00:00
2024-12-19
07h45 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

i40e: Fix queues reservation for XDP

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: i40e: Fix queues reservation for XDP When XDP was configured on a system with large number of CPUs and X722 NIC there was a call trace with NULL pointer dereference. i40e 0000:87:00.0: failed to get tracking for 256 queues for VSI 0 err -12 i40e 0000:87:00.0: setup of MAIN VSI failed BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000 RIP: 0010:i40e_xdp+0xea/0x1b0 [i40e] Call Trace: ? i40e_reconfig_rss_queues+0x130/0x130 [i40e] dev_xdp_install+0x61/0xe0 dev_xdp_attach+0x18a/0x4c0 dev_change_xdp_fd+0x1e6/0x220 do_setlink+0x616/0x1030 ? ahci_port_stop+0x80/0x80 ? ata_qc_issue+0x107/0x1e0 ? lock_timer_base+0x61/0x80 ? __mod_timer+0x202/0x380 rtnl_setlink+0xe5/0x170 ? bpf_lsm_binder_transaction+0x10/0x10 ? security_capable+0x36/0x50 rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x121/0x350 ? rtnl_calcit.isra.0+0x100/0x100 netlink_rcv_skb+0x50/0xf0 netlink_unicast+0x1d3/0x2a0 netlink_sendmsg+0x22a/0x440 sock_sendmsg+0x5e/0x60 __sys_sendto+0xf0/0x160 ? __sys_getsockname+0x7e/0xc0 ? _copy_from_user+0x3c/0x80 ? __sys_setsockopt+0xc8/0x1a0 __x64_sys_sendto+0x20/0x30 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae RIP: 0033:0x7f83fa7a39e0 This was caused by PF queue pile fragmentation due to flow director VSI queue being placed right after main VSI. Because of this main VSI was not able to resize its queue allocation for XDP resulting in no queues allocated for main VSI when XDP was turned on. Fix this by always allocating last queue in PF queue pile for a flow director VSI.

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) 3.12 To (excluding) 4.19.228

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 4.20 To (excluding) 5.4.176

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.5 To (excluding) 5.10.96

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 5.16.5

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 5.17

References