CVE-2022-48808 : Detail

CVE-2022-48808

5.5
/
Medium
0.04%V3
Local
2024-07-16
11h43 +00:00
2024-12-19
08h08 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

net: dsa: fix panic when DSA master device unbinds on shutdown

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: dsa: fix panic when DSA master device unbinds on shutdown Rafael reports that on a system with LX2160A and Marvell DSA switches, if a reboot occurs while the DSA master (dpaa2-eth) is up, the following panic can be seen: systemd-shutdown[1]: Rebooting. Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 00a0000800000041 [00a0000800000041] address between user and kernel address ranges Internal error: Oops: 96000004 [#1] PREEMPT SMP CPU: 6 PID: 1 Comm: systemd-shutdow Not tainted 5.16.5-00042-g8f5585009b24 #32 pc : dsa_slave_netdevice_event+0x130/0x3e4 lr : raw_notifier_call_chain+0x50/0x6c Call trace: dsa_slave_netdevice_event+0x130/0x3e4 raw_notifier_call_chain+0x50/0x6c call_netdevice_notifiers_info+0x54/0xa0 __dev_close_many+0x50/0x130 dev_close_many+0x84/0x120 unregister_netdevice_many+0x130/0x710 unregister_netdevice_queue+0x8c/0xd0 unregister_netdev+0x20/0x30 dpaa2_eth_remove+0x68/0x190 fsl_mc_driver_remove+0x20/0x5c __device_release_driver+0x21c/0x220 device_release_driver_internal+0xac/0xb0 device_links_unbind_consumers+0xd4/0x100 __device_release_driver+0x94/0x220 device_release_driver+0x28/0x40 bus_remove_device+0x118/0x124 device_del+0x174/0x420 fsl_mc_device_remove+0x24/0x40 __fsl_mc_device_remove+0xc/0x20 device_for_each_child+0x58/0xa0 dprc_remove+0x90/0xb0 fsl_mc_driver_remove+0x20/0x5c __device_release_driver+0x21c/0x220 device_release_driver+0x28/0x40 bus_remove_device+0x118/0x124 device_del+0x174/0x420 fsl_mc_bus_remove+0x80/0x100 fsl_mc_bus_shutdown+0xc/0x1c platform_shutdown+0x20/0x30 device_shutdown+0x154/0x330 __do_sys_reboot+0x1cc/0x250 __arm64_sys_reboot+0x20/0x30 invoke_syscall.constprop.0+0x4c/0xe0 do_el0_svc+0x4c/0x150 el0_svc+0x24/0xb0 el0t_64_sync_handler+0xa8/0xb0 el0t_64_sync+0x178/0x17c It can be seen from the stack trace that the problem is that the deregistration of the master causes a dev_close(), which gets notified as NETDEV_GOING_DOWN to dsa_slave_netdevice_event(). But dsa_switch_shutdown() has already run, and this has unregistered the DSA slave interfaces, and yet, the NETDEV_GOING_DOWN handler attempts to call dev_close_many() on those slave interfaces, leading to the problem. The previous attempt to avoid the NETDEV_GOING_DOWN on the master after dsa_switch_shutdown() was called seems improper. Unregistering the slave interfaces is unnecessary and unhelpful. Instead, after the slaves have stopped being uppers of the DSA master, we can now reset to NULL the master->dsa_ptr pointer, which will make DSA start ignoring all future notifier events on the master.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE Other No informations.

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.

 nvd@nist.gov

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) 5.15 To (excluding) 5.15.155

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 5.16.10

References