fkie_cve-2024-27005
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd
Published
2024-05-01 06:15
Modified
2025-04-08 18:43
Severity ?
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
interconnect: Don't access req_list while it's being manipulated
The icc_lock mutex was split into separate icc_lock and icc_bw_lock
mutexes in [1] to avoid lockdep splats. However, this didn't adequately
protect access to icc_node::req_list.
The icc_set_bw() function will eventually iterate over req_list while
only holding icc_bw_lock, but req_list can be modified while only
holding icc_lock. This causes races between icc_set_bw(), of_icc_get(),
and icc_put().
Example A:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
icc_set_bw(path_a)
mutex_lock(&icc_bw_lock);
icc_put(path_b)
mutex_lock(&icc_lock);
aggregate_requests()
hlist_for_each_entry(r, ...
hlist_del(...
<r = invalid pointer>
Example B:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
icc_set_bw(path_a)
mutex_lock(&icc_bw_lock);
path_b = of_icc_get()
of_icc_get_by_index()
mutex_lock(&icc_lock);
path_find()
path_init()
aggregate_requests()
hlist_for_each_entry(r, ...
hlist_add_head(...
<r = invalid pointer>
Fix this by ensuring icc_bw_lock is always held before manipulating
icc_node::req_list. The additional places icc_bw_lock is held don't
perform any memory allocations, so we should still be safe from the
original lockdep splats that motivated the separate locks.
[1] commit af42269c3523 ("interconnect: Fix locking for runpm vs reclaim")
References
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Version | |
|---|---|---|---|
| linux | linux_kernel | * | |
| linux | linux_kernel | * | |
| linux | linux_kernel | * | |
| linux | linux_kernel | * | |
| linux | linux_kernel | 6.9 | |
| linux | linux_kernel | 6.9 | |
| linux | linux_kernel | 6.9 | |
| linux | linux_kernel | 6.9 |
{
"configurations": [
{
"nodes": [
{
"cpeMatch": [
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "6D0A76D9-EE74-4B8A-92A4-1C7A0FDFC283",
"versionEndExcluding": "5.16",
"versionStartIncluding": "5.15.133",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "05A2D702-83B6-45D3-8690-6E4FF01F5E75",
"versionEndExcluding": "6.2",
"versionStartIncluding": "6.1.55",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "68E16AD4-0EF2-4134-8518-29A29136A800",
"versionEndExcluding": "6.6.29",
"versionStartIncluding": "6.5.5",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "673B3328-389D-41A4-9617-669298635262",
"versionEndExcluding": "6.8.8",
"versionStartIncluding": "6.7",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.9:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "22BEDD49-2C6D-402D-9DBF-6646F6ECD10B",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.9:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "DF73CB2A-DFFD-46FB-9BFE-AA394F27EA37",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.9:rc3:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "52048DDA-FC5A-4363-95A0-A6357B4D7F8C",
"vulnerable": true
},
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.9:rc4:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "A06B2CCF-3F43-4FA9-8773-C83C3F5764B2",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"negate": false,
"operator": "OR"
}
]
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\ninterconnect: Don\u0027t access req_list while it\u0027s being manipulated\n\nThe icc_lock mutex was split into separate icc_lock and icc_bw_lock\nmutexes in [1] to avoid lockdep splats. However, this didn\u0027t adequately\nprotect access to icc_node::req_list.\n\nThe icc_set_bw() function will eventually iterate over req_list while\nonly holding icc_bw_lock, but req_list can be modified while only\nholding icc_lock. This causes races between icc_set_bw(), of_icc_get(),\nand icc_put().\n\nExample A:\n\n CPU0 CPU1\n ---- ----\n icc_set_bw(path_a)\n mutex_lock(\u0026icc_bw_lock);\n icc_put(path_b)\n mutex_lock(\u0026icc_lock);\n aggregate_requests()\n hlist_for_each_entry(r, ...\n hlist_del(...\n \u003cr = invalid pointer\u003e\n\nExample B:\n\n CPU0 CPU1\n ---- ----\n icc_set_bw(path_a)\n mutex_lock(\u0026icc_bw_lock);\n path_b = of_icc_get()\n of_icc_get_by_index()\n mutex_lock(\u0026icc_lock);\n path_find()\n path_init()\n aggregate_requests()\n hlist_for_each_entry(r, ...\n hlist_add_head(...\n \u003cr = invalid pointer\u003e\n\nFix this by ensuring icc_bw_lock is always held before manipulating\nicc_node::req_list. The additional places icc_bw_lock is held don\u0027t\nperform any memory allocations, so we should still be safe from the\noriginal lockdep splats that motivated the separate locks.\n\n[1] commit af42269c3523 (\"interconnect: Fix locking for runpm vs reclaim\")"
},
{
"lang": "es",
"value": "En el kernel de Linux, se ha resuelto la siguiente vulnerabilidad: interconexi\u00f3n: no acceder a req_list mientras se est\u00e1 manipulando. El mutex icc_lock se dividi\u00f3 en mutex icc_lock e icc_bw_lock separados en [1] para evitar s\u00edmbolos de bloqueo. Sin embargo, esto no protegi\u00f3 adecuadamente el acceso a icc_node::req_list. La funci\u00f3n icc_set_bw() eventualmente iterar\u00e1 sobre req_list mientras solo mantiene icc_bw_lock, pero req_list se puede modificar mientras solo mantiene icc_lock. Esto provoca ejecuci\u00f3ns entre icc_set_bw(), of_icc_get() e icc_put(). Ejemplo A: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- icc_set_bw(path_a) mutex_lock(\u0026amp;icc_bw_lock); icc_put(ruta_b) mutex_lock(\u0026amp;icc_lock); agregado_requests() hlist_for_each_entry(r, ... hlist_del(... Ejemplo B: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- icc_set_bw(path_a) mutex_lock(\u0026amp;icc_bw_lock); path_b = of_icc_get() of_icc_get_by_index( ) mutex_lock(\u0026amp;icc_lock); path_find() path_init() agregado_requests() hlist_for_each_entry(r, ... hlist_add_head(... Solucione este problema asegur\u00e1ndose de que icc_bw_lock siempre se mantenga antes de manipular icc_node::req_list. El adicional Los lugares donde se mantiene icc_bw_lock no realizan ninguna asignaci\u00f3n de memoria, por lo que a\u00fan deber\u00edamos estar a salvo de los s\u00edmbolos de bloqueo originales que motivaron los bloqueos separados [1] commit af42269c3523 (\"interconexi\u00f3n: arreglar el bloqueo para runpm vs reclaim\")"
}
],
"id": "CVE-2024-27005",
"lastModified": "2025-04-08T18:43:15.860",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV31": [
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "HIGH",
"attackVector": "LOCAL",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 6.3,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "LOW",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 1.0,
"impactScore": 5.2,
"source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
},
"published": "2024-05-01T06:15:18.883",
"references": [
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"tags": [
"Patch"
],
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4c65507121ea8e0b47fae6d2049c8688390d46b6"
},
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"tags": [
"Patch"
],
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d0d04efa2e367921654b5106cc5c05e3757c2b42"
},
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"tags": [
"Patch"
],
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/de1bf25b6d771abdb52d43546cf57ad775fb68a1"
},
{
"source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"tags": [
"Patch"
],
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4c65507121ea8e0b47fae6d2049c8688390d46b6"
},
{
"source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"tags": [
"Patch"
],
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d0d04efa2e367921654b5106cc5c05e3757c2b42"
},
{
"source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
"tags": [
"Patch"
],
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/de1bf25b6d771abdb52d43546cf57ad775fb68a1"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"vulnStatus": "Analyzed",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-362"
},
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-667"
}
],
"source": "nvd@nist.gov",
"type": "Primary"
}
]
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
Loading…