CVE-2024-35870 : Detail

CVE-2024-35870

4.4
/
Medium
Memory Corruption
0.04%V4
Local
2024-05-19
08h34 +00:00
2024-12-19
18h32 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

smb: client: fix UAF in smb2_reconnect_server()

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: smb: client: fix UAF in smb2_reconnect_server() The UAF bug is due to smb2_reconnect_server() accessing a session that is already being teared down by another thread that is executing __cifs_put_smb_ses(). This can happen when (a) the client has connection to the server but no session or (b) another thread ends up setting @ses->ses_status again to something different than SES_EXITING. To fix this, we need to make sure to unconditionally set @ses->ses_status to SES_EXITING and prevent any other threads from setting a new status while we're still tearing it down. The following can be reproduced by adding some delay to right after the ipc is freed in __cifs_put_smb_ses() - which will give smb2_reconnect_server() worker a chance to run and then accessing @ses->ipc: kinit ... mount.cifs //srv/share /mnt/1 -o sec=krb5,nohandlecache,echo_interval=10 [disconnect srv] ls /mnt/1 &>/dev/null sleep 30 kdestroy [reconnect srv] sleep 10 umount /mnt/1 ... CIFS: VFS: Verify user has a krb5 ticket and keyutils is installed CIFS: VFS: \\srv Send error in SessSetup = -126 CIFS: VFS: Verify user has a krb5 ticket and keyutils is installed CIFS: VFS: \\srv Send error in SessSetup = -126 general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0x6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI CPU: 3 PID: 50 Comm: kworker/3:1 Not tainted 6.9.0-rc2 #1 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.3-1.fc39 04/01/2014 Workqueue: cifsiod smb2_reconnect_server [cifs] RIP: 0010:__list_del_entry_valid_or_report+0x33/0xf0 Code: 4f 08 48 85 d2 74 42 48 85 c9 74 59 48 b8 00 01 00 00 00 00 ad de 48 39 c2 74 61 48 b8 22 01 00 00 00 00 74 69 <48> 8b 01 48 39 f8 75 7b 48 8b 72 08 48 39 c6 0f 85 88 00 00 00 b8 RSP: 0018:ffffc900001bfd70 EFLAGS: 00010a83 RAX: dead000000000122 RBX: ffff88810da53838 RCX: 6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b RDX: 6b6b6b6b6b6b6b6b RSI: ffffffffc02f6878 RDI: ffff88810da53800 RBP: ffff88810da53800 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: 0000000000000000 R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000001 R12: ffff88810c064000 R13: 0000000000000001 R14: ffff88810c064000 R15: ffff8881039cc000 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff888157c00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007fe3728b1000 CR3: 000000010caa4000 CR4: 0000000000750ef0 PKRU: 55555554 Call Trace: ? die_addr+0x36/0x90 ? exc_general_protection+0x1c1/0x3f0 ? asm_exc_general_protection+0x26/0x30 ? __list_del_entry_valid_or_report+0x33/0xf0 __cifs_put_smb_ses+0x1ae/0x500 [cifs] smb2_reconnect_server+0x4ed/0x710 [cifs] process_one_work+0x205/0x6b0 worker_thread+0x191/0x360 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0xe2/0x110 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x34/0x50 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30

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 4.4 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

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.

High

The attacker requires privileges that provide significant (e.g., administrative) control over the vulnerable component allowing access to component-wide settings and files.

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.

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.

None

There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

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 To (excluding) 6.1.121

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 To (excluding) 6.6.29

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.8.5

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9

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.