CVE-2024-50045 Detail

CVE-2024-50045

Score / Severity

5.5

Medium

CVE Descriptions

netfilter: br_netfilter: fix panic with metadata_dst skb

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfilter: br_netfilter: fix panic with metadata_dst skb Fix a kernel panic in the br_netfilter module when sending untagged traffic via a VxLAN device. This happens during the check for fragmentation in br_nf_dev_queue_xmit. It is dependent on: 1) the br_netfilter module being loaded; 2) net.bridge.bridge-nf-call-iptables set to 1; 3) a bridge with a VxLAN (single-vxlan-device) netdevice as a bridge port; 4) untagged frames with size higher than the VxLAN MTU forwarded/flooded When forwarding the untagged packet to the VxLAN bridge port, before the netfilter hooks are called, br_handle_egress_vlan_tunnel is called and changes the skb_dst to the tunnel dst. The tunnel_dst is a metadata type of dst, i.e., skb_valid_dst(skb) is false, and metadata->dst.dev is NULL. Then in the br_netfilter hooks, in br_nf_dev_queue_xmit, there's a check for frames that needs to be fragmented: frames with higher MTU than the VxLAN device end up calling br_nf_ip_fragment, which in turns call ip_skb_dst_mtu. The ip_dst_mtu tries to use the skb_dst(skb) as if it was a valid dst with valid dst->dev, thus the crash. This case was never supported in the first place, so drop the packet instead. PING 10.0.0.2 (10.0.0.2) from 0.0.0.0 h1-eth0: 2000(2028) bytes of data. [ 176.291791] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000000000000110 [ 176.292101] Mem abort info: [ 176.292184] ESR = 0x0000000096000004 [ 176.292322] EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits [ 176.292530] SET = 0, FnV = 0 [ 176.292709] EA = 0, S1PTW = 0 [ 176.292862] FSC = 0x04: level 0 translation fault [ 176.293013] Data abort info: [ 176.293104] ISV = 0, ISS = 0x00000004, ISS2 = 0x00000000 [ 176.293488] CM = 0, WnR = 0, TnD = 0, TagAccess = 0 [ 176.293787] GCS = 0, Overlay = 0, DirtyBit = 0, Xs = 0 [ 176.293995] user pgtable: 4k pages, 48-bit VAs, pgdp=0000000043ef5000 [ 176.294166] [0000000000000110] pgd=0000000000000000, p4d=0000000000000000 [ 176.294827] Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000004 [#1] PREEMPT SMP [ 176.295252] Modules linked in: vxlan ip6_udp_tunnel udp_tunnel veth br_netfilter bridge stp llc ipv6 crct10dif_ce [ 176.295923] CPU: 0 PID: 188 Comm: ping Not tainted 6.8.0-rc3-g5b3fbd61b9d1 #2 [ 176.296314] Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT) [ 176.296535] pstate: 80000005 (Nzcv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) [ 176.296808] pc : br_nf_dev_queue_xmit+0x390/0x4ec [br_netfilter] [ 176.297382] lr : br_nf_dev_queue_xmit+0x2ac/0x4ec [br_netfilter] [ 176.297636] sp : ffff800080003630 [ 176.297743] x29: ffff800080003630 x28: 0000000000000008 x27: ffff6828c49ad9f8 [ 176.298093] x26: ffff6828c49ad000 x25: 0000000000000000 x24: 00000000000003e8 [ 176.298430] x23: 0000000000000000 x22: ffff6828c4960b40 x21: ffff6828c3b16d28 [ 176.298652] x20: ffff6828c3167048 x19: ffff6828c3b16d00 x18: 0000000000000014 [ 176.298926] x17: ffffb0476322f000 x16: ffffb7e164023730 x15: 0000000095744632 [ 176.299296] x14: ffff6828c3f1c880 x13: 0000000000000002 x12: ffffb7e137926a70 [ 176.299574] x11: 0000000000000001 x10: ffff6828c3f1c898 x9 : 0000000000000000 [ 176.300049] x8 : ffff6828c49bf070 x7 : 0008460f18d5f20e x6 : f20e0100bebafeca [ 176.300302] x5 : ffff6828c7f918fe x4 : ffff6828c49bf070 x3 : 0000000000000000 [ 176.300586] x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : ffff6828c3c7ad00 x0 : ffff6828c7f918f0 [ 176.300889] Call trace: [ 176.301123] br_nf_dev_queue_xmit+0x390/0x4ec [br_netfilter] [ 176.301411] br_nf_post_routing+0x2a8/0x3e4 [br_netfilter] [ 176.301703] nf_hook_slow+0x48/0x124 [ 176.302060] br_forward_finish+0xc8/0xe8 [bridge] [ 176.302371] br_nf_hook_thresh+0x124/0x134 [br_netfilter] [ 176.302605] br_nf_forward_finish+0x118/0x22c [br_netfilter] [ 176.302824] br_nf_forward_ip.part.0+0x264/0x290 [br_netfilter] [ 176.303136] br_nf_forward+0x2b8/0x4e0 [br_netfilter] [ 176.303359] nf_hook_slow+0x48/0x124 [ 176.303 ---truncated---

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 More informations 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