CVE-2024-57802 : Detail

CVE-2024-57802

5.5
/
Medium
0.04%V3
Local
2025-01-15
13h10 +00:00
2025-01-20
06h28 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

netrom: check buffer length before accessing it

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netrom: check buffer length before accessing it Syzkaller reports an uninit value read from ax25cmp when sending raw message through ieee802154 implementation. ===================================================== BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in ax25cmp+0x3a5/0x460 net/ax25/ax25_addr.c:119 ax25cmp+0x3a5/0x460 net/ax25/ax25_addr.c:119 nr_dev_get+0x20e/0x450 net/netrom/nr_route.c:601 nr_route_frame+0x1a2/0xfc0 net/netrom/nr_route.c:774 nr_xmit+0x5a/0x1c0 net/netrom/nr_dev.c:144 __netdev_start_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:4940 [inline] netdev_start_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:4954 [inline] xmit_one net/core/dev.c:3548 [inline] dev_hard_start_xmit+0x247/0xa10 net/core/dev.c:3564 __dev_queue_xmit+0x33b8/0x5130 net/core/dev.c:4349 dev_queue_xmit include/linux/netdevice.h:3134 [inline] raw_sendmsg+0x654/0xc10 net/ieee802154/socket.c:299 ieee802154_sock_sendmsg+0x91/0xc0 net/ieee802154/socket.c:96 sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:730 [inline] __sock_sendmsg net/socket.c:745 [inline] ____sys_sendmsg+0x9c2/0xd60 net/socket.c:2584 ___sys_sendmsg+0x28d/0x3c0 net/socket.c:2638 __sys_sendmsg net/socket.c:2667 [inline] __do_sys_sendmsg net/socket.c:2676 [inline] __se_sys_sendmsg net/socket.c:2674 [inline] __x64_sys_sendmsg+0x307/0x490 net/socket.c:2674 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x44/0x110 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0x6b Uninit was created at: slab_post_alloc_hook+0x129/0xa70 mm/slab.h:768 slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:3478 [inline] kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x5e9/0xb10 mm/slub.c:3523 kmalloc_reserve+0x13d/0x4a0 net/core/skbuff.c:560 __alloc_skb+0x318/0x740 net/core/skbuff.c:651 alloc_skb include/linux/skbuff.h:1286 [inline] alloc_skb_with_frags+0xc8/0xbd0 net/core/skbuff.c:6334 sock_alloc_send_pskb+0xa80/0xbf0 net/core/sock.c:2780 sock_alloc_send_skb include/net/sock.h:1884 [inline] raw_sendmsg+0x36d/0xc10 net/ieee802154/socket.c:282 ieee802154_sock_sendmsg+0x91/0xc0 net/ieee802154/socket.c:96 sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:730 [inline] __sock_sendmsg net/socket.c:745 [inline] ____sys_sendmsg+0x9c2/0xd60 net/socket.c:2584 ___sys_sendmsg+0x28d/0x3c0 net/socket.c:2638 __sys_sendmsg net/socket.c:2667 [inline] __do_sys_sendmsg net/socket.c:2676 [inline] __se_sys_sendmsg net/socket.c:2674 [inline] __x64_sys_sendmsg+0x307/0x490 net/socket.c:2674 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x44/0x110 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0x6b CPU: 0 PID: 5037 Comm: syz-executor166 Not tainted 6.7.0-rc7-syzkaller-00003-gfbafc3e621c3 #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 11/17/2023 ===================================================== This issue occurs because the skb buffer is too small, and it's actual allocation is aligned. This hides an actual issue, which is that nr_route_frame does not validate the buffer size before using it. Fix this issue by checking skb->len before accessing any fields in skb->data. Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with Syzkaller.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE-908 Use of Uninitialized Resource
The product uses or accesses a resource that has not been initialized.

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) 2.6.12 To (excluding) 5.4.289

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.5 To (excluding) 5.10.233

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.176

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.1.124

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 To (excluding) 6.6.70

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.12.9

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.13

References