CVE-2023-52587 Detail

CVE-2023-52587

Score / Severity

5.5

Medium

EPSS

0.05%V3

Vector

Local

Published

2024-03-06
06h45 +00:00

Modified

2024-12-19
08h22 +00:00

Official links

CVE.org

NVD

Notifications for a CVE

Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.

Notifications manage

List of Notifications

Notifications for a CVE

Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.

Criteria applied when sending the alert: compared with the last alert sent + differences in CISA, EPSS, CVSS, CWE, Solutions, CPE.

Parameters

You can specify a title that will be retrieved in the alerts that will be sent out.

Specified here a CVE ID as CVE-2025-1234

Planning

Month

Next run calculation

Day

Weekday

Hour

Minute

Creation date

Last execution

Next execution

Functionality requiring a connection

This feature, which allows you to receive alerts, is only active when you are logged into your account.

CVE Descriptions

IB/ipoib: Fix mcast list locking

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: IB/ipoib: Fix mcast list locking Releasing the `priv->lock` while iterating the `priv->multicast_list` in `ipoib_mcast_join_task()` opens a window for `ipoib_mcast_dev_flush()` to remove the items while in the middle of iteration. If the mcast is removed while the lock was dropped, the for loop spins forever resulting in a hard lockup (as was reported on RHEL 4.18.0-372.75.1.el8_6 kernel): Task A (kworker/u72:2 below) | Task B (kworker/u72:0 below) -----------------------------------+----------------------------------- ipoib_mcast_join_task(work) | ipoib_ib_dev_flush_light(work) spin_lock_irq(&priv->lock) | __ipoib_ib_dev_flush(priv, ...) list_for_each_entry(mcast, | ipoib_mcast_dev_flush(dev = priv->dev) &priv->multicast_list, list) | ipoib_mcast_join(dev, mcast) | spin_unlock_irq(&priv->lock) | | spin_lock_irqsave(&priv->lock, flags) | list_for_each_entry_safe(mcast, tmcast, | &priv->multicast_list, list) | list_del(&mcast->list); | list_add_tail(&mcast->list, &remove_list) | spin_unlock_irqrestore(&priv->lock, flags) spin_lock_irq(&priv->lock) | | ipoib_mcast_remove_list(&remove_list) (Here, `mcast` is no longer on the | list_for_each_entry_safe(mcast, tmcast, `priv->multicast_list` and we keep | remove_list, list) spinning on the `remove_list` of | >>> wait_for_completion(&mcast->done) the other thread which is blocked | and the list is still valid on | it's stack.) Fix this by keeping the lock held and changing to GFP_ATOMIC to prevent eventual sleeps. Unfortunately we could not reproduce the lockup and confirm this fix but based on the code review I think this fix should address such lockups. crash> bc 31 PID: 747 TASK: ff1c6a1a007e8000 CPU: 31 COMMAND: "kworker/u72:2" -- [exception RIP: ipoib_mcast_join_task+0x1b1] RIP: ffffffffc0944ac1 RSP: ff646f199a8c7e00 RFLAGS: 00000002 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ff1c6a1a04dc82f8 RCX: 0000000000000000 work (&priv->mcast_task{,.work}) RDX: ff1c6a192d60ac68 RSI: 0000000000000286 RDI: ff1c6a1a04dc8000 &mcast->list RBP: ff646f199a8c7e90 R8: ff1c699980019420 R9: ff1c6a1920c9a000 R10: ff646f199a8c7e00 R11: ff1c6a191a7d9800 R12: ff1c6a192d60ac00 mcast R13: ff1c6a1d82200000 R14: ff1c6a1a04dc8000 R15: ff1c6a1a04dc82d8 dev priv (&priv->lock) &priv->multicast_list (aka head) ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffffff CS: 0010 SS: 0018 --- --- #5 [ff646f199a8c7e00] ipoib_mcast_join_task+0x1b1 at ffffffffc0944ac1 [ib_ipoib] #6 [ff646f199a8c7e98] process_one_work+0x1a7 at ffffffff9bf10967 crash> rx ff646f199a8c7e68 ff646f199a8c7e68: ff1c6a1a04dc82f8 <<< work = &priv->mcast_task.work crash> list -hO ipoib_dev_priv.multicast_list ff1c6a1a04dc8000 (empty) crash> ipoib_dev_priv.mcast_task.work.func,mcast_mutex.owner.counter ff1c6a1a04dc8000 mcast_task.work.func = 0xffffffffc0944910 , mcast_mutex.owner.counter = 0xff1c69998efec000 crash> b 8 PID: 8 TASK: ff1c69998efec000 CPU: 33 COMMAND: "kworker/u72:0" -- #3 [ff646f1980153d50] wait_for_completion+0x96 at ffffffff9c7d7646 #4 [ff646f1980153d90] ipoib_mcast_remove_list+0x56 at ffffffffc0944dc6 [ib_ipoib] #5 [ff646f1980153de8] ipoib_mcast_dev_flush+0x1a7 at ffffffffc09455a7 [ib_ipoib] #6 [ff646f1980153e58] __ipoib_ib_dev_flush+0x1a4 at ffffffffc09431a4 [ib_ipoib] #7 [ff ---truncated---

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID	Weakness Name	Source
CWE-667	Improper Locking The product does not properly acquire or release a lock on a resource, leading to unexpected resource state changes and behaviors.

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