CVE-2023-52490 : Detail

CVE-2023-52490

5.5
/
Medium
Memory Corruption
0.04%V3
Local
2024-02-29
15h52 +00:00
2024-12-19
08h20 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

mm: migrate: fix getting incorrect page mapping during page migration

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm: migrate: fix getting incorrect page mapping during page migration When running stress-ng testing, we found below kernel crash after a few hours: Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000000000000000 pc : dentry_name+0xd8/0x224 lr : pointer+0x22c/0x370 sp : ffff800025f134c0 ...... Call trace: dentry_name+0xd8/0x224 pointer+0x22c/0x370 vsnprintf+0x1ec/0x730 vscnprintf+0x2c/0x60 vprintk_store+0x70/0x234 vprintk_emit+0xe0/0x24c vprintk_default+0x3c/0x44 vprintk_func+0x84/0x2d0 printk+0x64/0x88 __dump_page+0x52c/0x530 dump_page+0x14/0x20 set_migratetype_isolate+0x110/0x224 start_isolate_page_range+0xc4/0x20c offline_pages+0x124/0x474 memory_block_offline+0x44/0xf4 memory_subsys_offline+0x3c/0x70 device_offline+0xf0/0x120 ...... After analyzing the vmcore, I found this issue is caused by page migration. The scenario is that, one thread is doing page migration, and we will use the target page's ->mapping field to save 'anon_vma' pointer between page unmap and page move, and now the target page is locked and refcount is 1. Currently, there is another stress-ng thread performing memory hotplug, attempting to offline the target page that is being migrated. It discovers that the refcount of this target page is 1, preventing the offline operation, thus proceeding to dump the page. However, page_mapping() of the target page may return an incorrect file mapping to crash the system in dump_mapping(), since the target page->mapping only saves 'anon_vma' pointer without setting PAGE_MAPPING_ANON flag. There are seveval ways to fix this issue: (1) Setting the PAGE_MAPPING_ANON flag for target page's ->mapping when saving 'anon_vma', but this can confuse PageAnon() for PFN walkers, since the target page has not built mappings yet. (2) Getting the page lock to call page_mapping() in __dump_page() to avoid crashing the system, however, there are still some PFN walkers that call page_mapping() without holding the page lock, such as compaction. (3) Using target page->private field to save the 'anon_vma' pointer and 2 bits page state, just as page->mapping records an anonymous page, which can remove the page_mapping() impact for PFN walkers and also seems a simple way. So I choose option 3 to fix this issue, and this can also fix other potential issues for PFN walkers, such as compaction.

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) 6.3 To (excluding) 6.6.15

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.7.3

References