CVE-2024-57979 Detail

CVE-2024-57979

Score / Severity

7.8

High

CVE Descriptions

pps: Fix a use-after-free

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: pps: Fix a use-after-free On a board running ntpd and gpsd, I'm seeing a consistent use-after-free in sys_exit() from gpsd when rebooting: pps pps1: removed ------------[ cut here ]------------ kobject: '(null)' (00000000db4bec24): is not initialized, yet kobject_put() is being called. WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 440 at lib/kobject.c:734 kobject_put+0x120/0x150 CPU: 2 UID: 299 PID: 440 Comm: gpsd Not tainted 6.11.0-rc6-00308-gb31c44928842 #1 Hardware name: Raspberry Pi 4 Model B Rev 1.1 (DT) pstate: 60000005 (nZCv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) pc : kobject_put+0x120/0x150 lr : kobject_put+0x120/0x150 sp : ffffffc0803d3ae0 x29: ffffffc0803d3ae0 x28: ffffff8042dc9738 x27: 0000000000000001 x26: 0000000000000000 x25: ffffff8042dc9040 x24: ffffff8042dc9440 x23: ffffff80402a4620 x22: ffffff8042ef4bd0 x21: ffffff80405cb600 x20: 000000000008001b x19: ffffff8040b3b6e0 x18: 0000000000000000 x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000000 x15: 696e6920746f6e20 x14: 7369203a29343263 x13: 205d303434542020 x12: 0000000000000000 x11: 0000000000000000 x10: 0000000000000000 x9 : 0000000000000000 x8 : 0000000000000000 x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : 0000000000000000 x5 : 0000000000000000 x4 : 0000000000000000 x3 : 0000000000000000 x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : 0000000000000000 x0 : 0000000000000000 Call trace: kobject_put+0x120/0x150 cdev_put+0x20/0x3c __fput+0x2c4/0x2d8 ____fput+0x1c/0x38 task_work_run+0x70/0xfc do_exit+0x2a0/0x924 do_group_exit+0x34/0x90 get_signal+0x7fc/0x8c0 do_signal+0x128/0x13b4 do_notify_resume+0xdc/0x160 el0_svc+0xd4/0xf8 el0t_64_sync_handler+0x140/0x14c el0t_64_sync+0x190/0x194 ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- ...followed by more symptoms of corruption, with similar stacks: refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free. kernel BUG at lib/list_debug.c:62! Kernel panic - not syncing: Oops - BUG: Fatal exception This happens because pps_device_destruct() frees the pps_device with the embedded cdev immediately after calling cdev_del(), but, as the comment above cdev_del() notes, fops for previously opened cdevs are still callable even after cdev_del() returns. I think this bug has always been there: I can't explain why it suddenly started happening every time I reboot this particular board. In commit d953e0e837e6 ("pps: Fix a use-after free bug when unregistering a source."), George Spelvin suggested removing the embedded cdev. That seems like the simplest way to fix this, so I've implemented his suggestion, using __register_chrdev() with pps_idr becoming the source of truth for which minor corresponds to which device. But now that pps_idr defines userspace visibility instead of cdev_add(), we need to be sure the pps->dev refcount can't reach zero while userspace can still find it again. So, the idr_remove() call moves to pps_unregister_cdev(), and pps_idr now holds a reference to pps->dev. pps_core: source serial1 got cdev (251:1) <...> pps pps1: removed pps_core: unregistering pps1 pps_core: deallocating pps1

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	7.8	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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. 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. High There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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.	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