CVE-2024-26939 : Détail

CVE-2024-26939

7
/
Haute
Memory Corruption
0.05%V4
Local
2024-05-01
05h17 +00:00
2024-12-19
08h50 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications pour un CVE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des notifications

Descriptions du CVE

drm/i915/vma: Fix UAF on destroy against retire race

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/i915/vma: Fix UAF on destroy against retire race Object debugging tools were sporadically reporting illegal attempts to free a still active i915 VMA object when parking a GT believed to be idle. [161.359441] ODEBUG: free active (active state 0) object: ffff88811643b958 object type: i915_active hint: __i915_vma_active+0x0/0x50 [i915] [161.360082] WARNING: CPU: 5 PID: 276 at lib/debugobjects.c:514 debug_print_object+0x80/0xb0 ... [161.360304] CPU: 5 PID: 276 Comm: kworker/5:2 Not tainted 6.5.0-rc1-CI_DRM_13375-g003f860e5577+ #1 [161.360314] Hardware name: Intel Corporation Rocket Lake Client Platform/RocketLake S UDIMM 6L RVP, BIOS RKLSFWI1.R00.3173.A03.2204210138 04/21/2022 [161.360322] Workqueue: i915-unordered __intel_wakeref_put_work [i915] [161.360592] RIP: 0010:debug_print_object+0x80/0xb0 ... [161.361347] debug_object_free+0xeb/0x110 [161.361362] i915_active_fini+0x14/0x130 [i915] [161.361866] release_references+0xfe/0x1f0 [i915] [161.362543] i915_vma_parked+0x1db/0x380 [i915] [161.363129] __gt_park+0x121/0x230 [i915] [161.363515] ____intel_wakeref_put_last+0x1f/0x70 [i915] That has been tracked down to be happening when another thread is deactivating the VMA inside __active_retire() helper, after the VMA's active counter has been already decremented to 0, but before deactivation of the VMA's object is reported to the object debugging tool. We could prevent from that race by serializing i915_active_fini() with __active_retire() via ref->tree_lock, but that wouldn't stop the VMA from being used, e.g. from __i915_vma_retire() called at the end of __active_retire(), after that VMA has been already freed by a concurrent i915_vma_destroy() on return from the i915_active_fini(). Then, we should rather fix the issue at the VMA level, not in i915_active. Since __i915_vma_parked() is called from __gt_park() on last put of the GT's wakeref, the issue could be addressed by holding the GT wakeref long enough for __active_retire() to complete before that wakeref is released and the GT parked. I believe the issue was introduced by commit d93939730347 ("drm/i915: Remove the vma refcount") which moved a call to i915_active_fini() from a dropped i915_vma_release(), called on last put of the removed VMA kref, to i915_vma_parked() processing path called on last put of a GT wakeref. However, its visibility to the object debugging tool was suppressed by a bug in i915_active that was fixed two weeks later with commit e92eb246feb9 ("drm/i915/active: Fix missing debug object activation"). A VMA associated with a request doesn't acquire a GT wakeref by itself. Instead, it depends on a wakeref held directly by the request's active intel_context for a GT associated with its VM, and indirectly on that intel_context's engine wakeref if the engine belongs to the same GT as the VMA's VM. Those wakerefs are released asynchronously to VMA deactivation. Fix the issue by getting a wakeref for the VMA's GT when activating it, and putting that wakeref only after the VMA is deactivated. However, exclude global GTT from that processing path, otherwise the GPU never goes idle. Since __i915_vma_retire() may be called from atomic contexts, use async variant of wakeref put. Also, to avoid circular locking dependency, take care of acquiring the wakeref before VM mutex when both are needed. v7: Add inline comments with justifications for: - using untracked variants of intel_gt_pm_get/put() (Nirmoy), - using async variant of _put(), - not getting the wakeref in case of a global GTT, - always getting the first wakeref outside vm->mutex. v6: Since __i915_vma_active/retire() callbacks are not serialized, storing a wakeref tracking handle inside struct i915_vma is not safe, and there is no other good place for that. Use untracked variants of intel_gt_pm_get/put_async(). v5: Replace "tile" with "GT" across commit description (Rodrigo), - ---truncated---

Informations du CVE

Faiblesses connexes

CWE-ID Nom de la faiblesse 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.

Métriques

Métriques Score Gravité CVSS Vecteur Source
V3.1 7 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.

High

successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected.

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.

 nvd@nist.gov

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) 5.19 To (excluding) 6.1.88

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 To (excluding) 6.6.29

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.8.3

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9

Références