ghsa-2wjg-qcgr-7p52
Vulnerability from github
Published
2024-08-21 09:31
Modified
2024-09-13 15:31
Details

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

io_uring: lock overflowing for IOPOLL

syzbot reports an issue with overflow filling for IOPOLL:

WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 28 at io_uring/io_uring.c:734 io_cqring_event_overflow+0x1c0/0x230 io_uring/io_uring.c:734 CPU: 0 PID: 28 Comm: kworker/u4:1 Not tainted 6.2.0-rc3-syzkaller-16369-g358a161a6a9e #0 Workqueue: events_unbound io_ring_exit_work Call trace:  io_cqring_event_overflow+0x1c0/0x230 io_uring/io_uring.c:734  io_req_cqe_overflow+0x5c/0x70 io_uring/io_uring.c:773  io_fill_cqe_req io_uring/io_uring.h:168 [inline]  io_do_iopoll+0x474/0x62c io_uring/rw.c:1065  io_iopoll_try_reap_events+0x6c/0x108 io_uring/io_uring.c:1513  io_uring_try_cancel_requests+0x13c/0x258 io_uring/io_uring.c:3056  io_ring_exit_work+0xec/0x390 io_uring/io_uring.c:2869  process_one_work+0x2d8/0x504 kernel/workqueue.c:2289  worker_thread+0x340/0x610 kernel/workqueue.c:2436  kthread+0x12c/0x158 kernel/kthread.c:376  ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S:863

There is no real problem for normal IOPOLL as flush is also called with uring_lock taken, but it's getting more complicated for IOPOLL|SQPOLL, for which __io_cqring_overflow_flush() happens from the CQ waiting path.

Show details on source website


{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-52903"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-667"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-08-21T07:15:06Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nio_uring: lock overflowing for IOPOLL\n\nsyzbot reports an issue with overflow filling for IOPOLL:\n\nWARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 28 at io_uring/io_uring.c:734 io_cqring_event_overflow+0x1c0/0x230 io_uring/io_uring.c:734\nCPU: 0 PID: 28 Comm: kworker/u4:1 Not tainted 6.2.0-rc3-syzkaller-16369-g358a161a6a9e #0\nWorkqueue: events_unbound io_ring_exit_work\nCall trace:\n\u00a0io_cqring_event_overflow+0x1c0/0x230 io_uring/io_uring.c:734\n\u00a0io_req_cqe_overflow+0x5c/0x70 io_uring/io_uring.c:773\n\u00a0io_fill_cqe_req io_uring/io_uring.h:168 [inline]\n\u00a0io_do_iopoll+0x474/0x62c io_uring/rw.c:1065\n\u00a0io_iopoll_try_reap_events+0x6c/0x108 io_uring/io_uring.c:1513\n\u00a0io_uring_try_cancel_requests+0x13c/0x258 io_uring/io_uring.c:3056\n\u00a0io_ring_exit_work+0xec/0x390 io_uring/io_uring.c:2869\n\u00a0process_one_work+0x2d8/0x504 kernel/workqueue.c:2289\n\u00a0worker_thread+0x340/0x610 kernel/workqueue.c:2436\n\u00a0kthread+0x12c/0x158 kernel/kthread.c:376\n\u00a0ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S:863\n\nThere is no real problem for normal IOPOLL as flush is also called with\nuring_lock taken, but it\u0027s getting more complicated for IOPOLL|SQPOLL,\nfor which __io_cqring_overflow_flush() happens from the CQ waiting path.",
  "id": "GHSA-2wjg-qcgr-7p52",
  "modified": "2024-09-13T15:31:31Z",
  "published": "2024-08-21T09:31:32Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-52903"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/544d163d659d45a206d8929370d5a2984e546cb7"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/7fc3990dad04a677606337ebc61964094d6cb41b"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/de77faee280163ff03b7ab64af6c9d779a43d4c4"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ed4629d1e968359fbb91d0a3780b1e86a2c08845"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

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.