CVE-2024-26787 : Détail

CVE-2024-26787

5.5
/
Moyen
0.04%V3
Local
2024-04-04
08h20 +00:00
2024-12-19
08h47 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications pour un CVE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des notifications

Descriptions du CVE

mmc: mmci: stm32: fix DMA API overlapping mappings warning

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mmc: mmci: stm32: fix DMA API overlapping mappings warning Turning on CONFIG_DMA_API_DEBUG_SG results in the following warning: DMA-API: mmci-pl18x 48220000.mmc: cacheline tracking EEXIST, overlapping mappings aren't supported WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 51 at kernel/dma/debug.c:568 add_dma_entry+0x234/0x2f4 Modules linked in: CPU: 1 PID: 51 Comm: kworker/1:2 Not tainted 6.1.28 #1 Hardware name: STMicroelectronics STM32MP257F-EV1 Evaluation Board (DT) Workqueue: events_freezable mmc_rescan Call trace: add_dma_entry+0x234/0x2f4 debug_dma_map_sg+0x198/0x350 __dma_map_sg_attrs+0xa0/0x110 dma_map_sg_attrs+0x10/0x2c sdmmc_idma_prep_data+0x80/0xc0 mmci_prep_data+0x38/0x84 mmci_start_data+0x108/0x2dc mmci_request+0xe4/0x190 __mmc_start_request+0x68/0x140 mmc_start_request+0x94/0xc0 mmc_wait_for_req+0x70/0x100 mmc_send_tuning+0x108/0x1ac sdmmc_execute_tuning+0x14c/0x210 mmc_execute_tuning+0x48/0xec mmc_sd_init_uhs_card.part.0+0x208/0x464 mmc_sd_init_card+0x318/0x89c mmc_attach_sd+0xe4/0x180 mmc_rescan+0x244/0x320 DMA API debug brings to light leaking dma-mappings as dma_map_sg and dma_unmap_sg are not correctly balanced. If an error occurs in mmci_cmd_irq function, only mmci_dma_error function is called and as this API is not managed on stm32 variant, dma_unmap_sg is never called in this error path.

Informations du CVE

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID Nom de la faiblesse Source
CWE Other No informations.

Métriques

Métriques Score Gravité CVSS Vecteur 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 est un modèle de notation qui prédit la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée.

Score EPSS

Le modèle EPSS produit un score de probabilité compris entre 0 et 1 (0 et 100 %). Plus la note est élevée, plus la probabilité qu'une vulnérabilité soit exploitée est grande.

Percentile EPSS

Le percentile est utilisé pour classer les CVE en fonction de leur score EPSS. Par exemple, une CVE dans le 95e percentile selon son score EPSS est plus susceptible d'être exploitée que 95 % des autres CVE. Ainsi, le percentile sert à comparer le score EPSS d'une CVE par rapport à d'autres CVE.
EPSS First.org

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 4.20 To (excluding) 5.10.213

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 5.15.152

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 To (excluding) 6.1.81

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 To (excluding) 6.6.21

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.7.9

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.8

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.8

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.8

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.8

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.8

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.8

Configuraton 0

Debian>>Debian_linux >> Version 10.0

Références