CVE-2024-26996 : Détail

CVE-2024-26996

7.8
/
Haute
Memory Corruption
0.04%V3
Local
2024-05-01
05h28 +00:00
2024-12-19
08h52 +00:00
CVE.org
NVD
Notifications pour un CVE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CVE spécifique.
Gestion des notifications

Descriptions du CVE

usb: gadget: f_ncm: Fix UAF ncm object at re-bind after usb ep transport error

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: usb: gadget: f_ncm: Fix UAF ncm object at re-bind after usb ep transport error When ncm function is working and then stop usb0 interface for link down, eth_stop() is called. At this piont, accidentally if usb transport error should happen in usb_ep_enable(), 'in_ep' and/or 'out_ep' may not be enabled. After that, ncm_disable() is called to disable for ncm unbind but gether_disconnect() is never called since 'in_ep' is not enabled. As the result, ncm object is released in ncm unbind but 'dev->port_usb' associated to 'ncm->port' is not NULL. And when ncm bind again to recover netdev, ncm object is reallocated but usb0 interface is already associated to previous released ncm object. Therefore, once usb0 interface is up and eth_start_xmit() is called, released ncm object is dereferrenced and it might cause use-after-free memory. [function unlink via configfs] usb0: eth_stop dev->port_usb=ffffff9b179c3200 --> error happens in usb_ep_enable(). NCM: ncm_disable: ncm=ffffff9b179c3200 --> no gether_disconnect() since ncm->port.in_ep->enabled is false. NCM: ncm_unbind: ncm unbind ncm=ffffff9b179c3200 NCM: ncm_free: ncm free ncm=ffffff9b179c3200 <-- released ncm [function link via configfs] NCM: ncm_alloc: ncm alloc ncm=ffffff9ac4f8a000 NCM: ncm_bind: ncm bind ncm=ffffff9ac4f8a000 NCM: ncm_set_alt: ncm=ffffff9ac4f8a000 alt=0 usb0: eth_open dev->port_usb=ffffff9b179c3200 <-- previous released ncm usb0: eth_start dev->port_usb=ffffff9b179c3200 <-- eth_start_xmit() --> dev->wrap() Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address dead00000000014f This patch addresses the issue by checking if 'ncm->netdev' is not NULL at ncm_disable() to call gether_disconnect() to deassociate 'dev->port_usb'. It's more reasonable to check 'ncm->netdev' to call gether_connect/disconnect rather than check 'ncm->port.in_ep->enabled' since it might not be enabled but the gether connection might be established.

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 7.8 HIGH CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/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.

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.

 [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 To (excluding) 5.15.157

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.16 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) 6.8.8

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.9

Références