CVE-2022-49753 : Detail

CVE-2022-49753

7.8
/
High
Memory Corruption
0.01%V4
Local
2025-03-27
16h43 +00:00
2025-03-28
15h31 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

dmaengine: Fix double increment of client_count in dma_chan_get()

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: dmaengine: Fix double increment of client_count in dma_chan_get() The first time dma_chan_get() is called for a channel the channel client_count is incorrectly incremented twice for public channels, first in balance_ref_count(), and again prior to returning. This results in an incorrect client count which will lead to the channel resources not being freed when they should be. A simple test of repeated module load and unload of async_tx on a Dell Power Edge R7425 also shows this resulting in a kref underflow warning. [ 124.329662] async_tx: api initialized (async) [ 129.000627] async_tx: api initialized (async) [ 130.047839] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 130.052472] refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free. [ 130.057279] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 19364 at lib/refcount.c:28 refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110 [ 130.065811] Modules linked in: async_tx(-) rfkill intel_rapl_msr intel_rapl_common amd64_edac edac_mce_amd ipmi_ssif kvm_amd dcdbas kvm mgag200 drm_shmem_helper acpi_ipmi irqbypass drm_kms_helper ipmi_si syscopyarea sysfillrect rapl pcspkr ipmi_devintf sysimgblt fb_sys_fops k10temp i2c_piix4 ipmi_msghandler acpi_power_meter acpi_cpufreq vfat fat drm fuse xfs libcrc32c sd_mod t10_pi sg ahci crct10dif_pclmul libahci crc32_pclmul crc32c_intel ghash_clmulni_intel igb megaraid_sas i40e libata i2c_algo_bit ccp sp5100_tco dca dm_mirror dm_region_hash dm_log dm_mod [last unloaded: async_tx] [ 130.117361] CPU: 3 PID: 19364 Comm: modprobe Kdump: loaded Not tainted 5.14.0-185.el9.x86_64 #1 [ 130.126091] Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R7425/02MJ3T, BIOS 1.18.0 01/17/2022 [ 130.133806] RIP: 0010:refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110 [ 130.139041] Code: 01 01 e8 6d bd 55 00 0f 0b e9 72 9d 8a 00 80 3d 26 18 9c 01 00 75 85 48 c7 c7 f8 a3 03 9d c6 05 16 18 9c 01 01 e8 4a bd 55 00 <0f> 0b e9 4f 9d 8a 00 80 3d 01 18 9c 01 00 0f 85 5e ff ff ff 48 c7 [ 130.157807] RSP: 0018:ffffbf98898afe68 EFLAGS: 00010286 [ 130.163036] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9da06028e598 RCX: 0000000000000000 [ 130.170172] RDX: ffff9daf9de26480 RSI: ffff9daf9de198a0 RDI: ffff9daf9de198a0 [ 130.177316] RBP: ffff9da7cddf3970 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00000000ffff7fff [ 130.184459] R10: ffffbf98898afd00 R11: ffffffff9d9e8c28 R12: ffff9da7cddf1970 [ 130.191596] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000 [ 130.198739] FS: 00007f646435c740(0000) GS:ffff9daf9de00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 130.206832] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 130.212586] CR2: 00007f6463b214f0 CR3: 00000008ab98c000 CR4: 00000000003506e0 [ 130.219729] Call Trace: [ 130.222192] [ 130.224305] dma_chan_put+0x10d/0x110 [ 130.227988] dmaengine_put+0x7a/0xa0 [ 130.231575] __do_sys_delete_module.constprop.0+0x178/0x280 [ 130.237157] ? syscall_trace_enter.constprop.0+0x145/0x1d0 [ 130.242652] do_syscall_64+0x5c/0x90 [ 130.246240] ? exc_page_fault+0x62/0x150 [ 130.250178] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd [ 130.255243] RIP: 0033:0x7f6463a3f5ab [ 130.258830] Code: 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 75 a8 1b 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48 83 c8 ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 90 f3 0f 1e fa b8 b0 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d 45 a8 1b 00 f7 d8 64 89 01 48 [ 130.277591] RSP: 002b:00007fff22f972c8 EFLAGS: 00000206 ORIG_RAX: 00000000000000b0 [ 130.285164] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 000055b6786edd40 RCX: 00007f6463a3f5ab [ 130.292303] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000800 RDI: 000055b6786edda8 [ 130.299443] RBP: 000055b6786edd40 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 [ 130.306584] R10: 00007f6463b9eac0 R11: 0000000000000206 R12: 000055b6786edda8 [ 130.313731] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 000055b6786edda8 R15: 00007fff22f995f8 [ 130.320875] [ 130.323081] ---[ end trace eff7156d56b5cf25 ]--- cat /sys/class/dma/dma0chan*/in_use would get the wrong result. 2 2 2 Test-by: Jie Hai

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-416 Use After Free
The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory "belongs" to the code that operates on the new pointer.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/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.

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.

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.
EPSS First.org

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 4.0 To (excluding) 4.14.305

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 4.15 To (excluding) 4.19.272

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 4.20 To (excluding) 5.4.231

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.5 To (excluding) 5.10.166

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.91

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.1.9

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.2

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.2

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.2

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.2

References

The information presented on CVE Find originates from several carefully selected reference sources. CVE data is provided by MITRE Corporation and the National Vulnerability Database (NVD). The Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog is sourced from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), while EPSS scores come from FIRST.org. Additionally, data regarding software weaknesses (CWE) and common attack patterns (CAPEC) is maintained by MITRE Corporation, and information on hardware and software configurations (CPE) is provided by the NVD.