English
Français
Light
Dark
System

Alert System

Stay informed at all times
Create an account Open a free account Login Manage your alerts

CVE-2024-36968 : Detail

CVE-2024-36968

6.5
/
MEDIUM
0.04%V3
Local
2024-06-08 12:53 +00:00
2024-08-02 03:43 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD

Alert for a CVE

Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Alert management

Descriptions

Bluetooth: L2CAP: Fix div-by-zero in l2cap_le_flowctl_init()

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: Bluetooth: L2CAP: Fix div-by-zero in l2cap_le_flowctl_init() l2cap_le_flowctl_init() can cause both div-by-zero and an integer overflow since hdev->le_mtu may not fall in the valid range. Move MTU from hci_dev to hci_conn to validate MTU and stop the connection process earlier if MTU is invalid. Also, add a missing validation in read_buffer_size() and make it return an error value if the validation fails. Now hci_conn_add() returns ERR_PTR() as it can fail due to the both a kzalloc failure and invalid MTU value. divide error: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN NOPTI CPU: 0 PID: 67 Comm: kworker/u5:0 Tainted: G W 6.9.0-rc5+ #20 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014 Workqueue: hci0 hci_rx_work RIP: 0010:l2cap_le_flowctl_init+0x19e/0x3f0 net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c:547 Code: e8 17 17 0c 00 66 41 89 9f 84 00 00 00 bf 01 00 00 00 41 b8 02 00 00 00 4c 89 fe 4c 89 e2 89 d9 e8 27 17 0c 00 44 89 f0 31 d2 <66> f7 f3 89 c3 ff c3 4d 8d b7 88 00 00 00 4c 89 f0 48 c1 e8 03 42 RSP: 0018:ffff88810bc0f858 EFLAGS: 00010246 RAX: 00000000000002a0 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: dffffc0000000000 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffff88810bc0f7c0 RDI: ffffc90002dcb66f RBP: ffff88810bc0f880 R08: aa69db2dda70ff01 R09: 0000ffaaaaaaaaaa R10: 0084000000ffaaaa R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffff88810d65a084 R13: dffffc0000000000 R14: 00000000000002a0 R15: ffff88810d65a000 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88811ac00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000000020000100 CR3: 0000000103268003 CR4: 0000000000770ef0 PKRU: 55555554 Call Trace: l2cap_le_connect_req net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c:4902 [inline] l2cap_le_sig_cmd net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c:5420 [inline] l2cap_le_sig_channel net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c:5486 [inline] l2cap_recv_frame+0xe59d/0x11710 net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c:6809 l2cap_recv_acldata+0x544/0x10a0 net/bluetooth/l2cap_core.c:7506 hci_acldata_packet net/bluetooth/hci_core.c:3939 [inline] hci_rx_work+0x5e5/0xb20 net/bluetooth/hci_core.c:4176 process_one_work kernel/workqueue.c:3254 [inline] process_scheduled_works+0x90f/0x1530 kernel/workqueue.c:3335 worker_thread+0x926/0xe70 kernel/workqueue.c:3416 kthread+0x2e3/0x380 kernel/kthread.c:388 ret_from_fork+0x5c/0x90 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:147 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:244 Modules linked in: ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---

Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-190 Integer Overflow or Wraparound
The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.
CWE-369 Divide By Zero
The product divides a value by zero.

Metrics

Metric Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 6.5 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/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.

Changed

An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.

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) 2.6.39 To (excluding) 6.6.32

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.8.11

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.9 To (excluding) 6.9.2

References


More information
Click on the button to the left (OFF), to authorize the inscription of cookie improving the functionalities of the site. Click on the button to the left (Accept all), to unauthorize the inscription of cookie improving the functionalities of the site.