CVE-2024-50104 : Detail

CVE-2024-50104

5.5
/
Medium
Memory Corruption
0.04%V3
Local
2024-11-05
17h10 +00:00
2024-12-19
09h33 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

ASoC: qcom: sdm845: add missing soundwire runtime stream alloc

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ASoC: qcom: sdm845: add missing soundwire runtime stream alloc During the migration of Soundwire runtime stream allocation from the Qualcomm Soundwire controller to SoC's soundcard drivers the sdm845 soundcard was forgotten. At this point any playback attempt or audio daemon startup, for instance on sdm845-db845c (Qualcomm RB3 board), will result in stream pointer NULL dereference: Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000000000000020 Mem abort info: ESR = 0x0000000096000004 EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits SET = 0, FnV = 0 EA = 0, S1PTW = 0 FSC = 0x04: level 0 translation fault Data abort info: ISV = 0, ISS = 0x00000004, ISS2 = 0x00000000 CM = 0, WnR = 0, TnD = 0, TagAccess = 0 GCS = 0, Overlay = 0, DirtyBit = 0, Xs = 0 user pgtable: 4k pages, 48-bit VAs, pgdp=0000000101ecf000 [0000000000000020] pgd=0000000000000000, p4d=0000000000000000 Internal error: Oops: 0000000096000004 [#1] PREEMPT SMP Modules linked in: ... CPU: 5 UID: 0 PID: 1198 Comm: aplay Not tainted 6.12.0-rc2-qcomlt-arm64-00059-g9d78f315a362-dirty #18 Hardware name: Thundercomm Dragonboard 845c (DT) pstate: 60400005 (nZCv daif +PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) pc : sdw_stream_add_slave+0x44/0x380 [soundwire_bus] lr : sdw_stream_add_slave+0x44/0x380 [soundwire_bus] sp : ffff80008a2035c0 x29: ffff80008a2035c0 x28: ffff80008a203978 x27: 0000000000000000 x26: 00000000000000c0 x25: 0000000000000000 x24: ffff1676025f4800 x23: ffff167600ff1cb8 x22: ffff167600ff1c98 x21: 0000000000000003 x20: ffff167607316000 x19: ffff167604e64e80 x18: 0000000000000000 x17: 0000000000000000 x16: ffffcec265074160 x15: 0000000000000000 x14: 0000000000000000 x13: 0000000000000000 x12: 0000000000000000 x11: 0000000000000000 x10: 0000000000000000 x9 : 0000000000000000 x8 : 0000000000000000 x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : ffff167600ff1cec x5 : ffffcec22cfa2010 x4 : 0000000000000000 x3 : 0000000000000003 x2 : ffff167613f836c0 x1 : 0000000000000000 x0 : ffff16761feb60b8 Call trace: sdw_stream_add_slave+0x44/0x380 [soundwire_bus] wsa881x_hw_params+0x68/0x80 [snd_soc_wsa881x] snd_soc_dai_hw_params+0x3c/0xa4 __soc_pcm_hw_params+0x230/0x660 dpcm_be_dai_hw_params+0x1d0/0x3f8 dpcm_fe_dai_hw_params+0x98/0x268 snd_pcm_hw_params+0x124/0x460 snd_pcm_common_ioctl+0x998/0x16e8 snd_pcm_ioctl+0x34/0x58 __arm64_sys_ioctl+0xac/0xf8 invoke_syscall+0x48/0x104 el0_svc_common.constprop.0+0x40/0xe0 do_el0_svc+0x1c/0x28 el0_svc+0x34/0xe0 el0t_64_sync_handler+0x120/0x12c el0t_64_sync+0x190/0x194 Code: aa0403fb f9418400 9100e000 9400102f (f8420f22) ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- 0000000000006108 : 6108: d503233f paciasp 610c: a9b97bfd stp x29, x30, [sp, #-112]! 6110: 910003fd mov x29, sp 6114: a90153f3 stp x19, x20, [sp, #16] 6118: a9025bf5 stp x21, x22, [sp, #32] 611c: aa0103f6 mov x22, x1 6120: 2a0303f5 mov w21, w3 6124: a90363f7 stp x23, x24, [sp, #48] 6128: aa0003f8 mov x24, x0 612c: aa0203f7 mov x23, x2 6130: a9046bf9 stp x25, x26, [sp, #64] 6134: aa0403f9 mov x25, x4 <-- x4 copied to x25 6138: a90573fb stp x27, x28, [sp, #80] 613c: aa0403fb mov x27, x4 6140: f9418400 ldr x0, [x0, #776] 6144: 9100e000 add x0, x0, #0x38 6148: 94000000 bl 0 614c: f8420f22 ldr x2, [x25, #32]! <-- offset 0x44 ^^^ This is 0x6108 + offset 0x44 from the beginning of sdw_stream_add_slave() where data abort happens. wsa881x_hw_params() is called with stream = NULL and passes it further in register x4 (5th argu ---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

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) 6.8 To (excluding) 6.11.6

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.12

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.12

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.12

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.12

References