fkie_cve-2024-53090
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd
Published
2024-11-21 19:15
Modified
2024-12-24 14:52
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: afs: Fix lock recursion afs_wake_up_async_call() can incur lock recursion. The problem is that it is called from AF_RXRPC whilst holding the ->notify_lock, but it tries to take a ref on the afs_call struct in order to pass it to a work queue - but if the afs_call is already queued, we then have an extraneous ref that must be put... calling afs_put_call() may call back down into AF_RXRPC through rxrpc_kernel_shutdown_call(), however, which might try taking the ->notify_lock again. This case isn't very common, however, so defer it to a workqueue. The oops looks something like: BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, krxrpcio/7001/1646 lock: 0xffff888141399b30, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: krxrpcio/7001/1646, .owner_cpu: 0 CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 1646 Comm: krxrpcio/7001 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc2-build3+ #4351 Hardware name: ASUS All Series/H97-PLUS, BIOS 2306 10/09/2014 Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x47/0x70 do_raw_spin_lock+0x3c/0x90 rxrpc_kernel_shutdown_call+0x83/0xb0 afs_put_call+0xd7/0x180 rxrpc_notify_socket+0xa0/0x190 rxrpc_input_split_jumbo+0x198/0x1d0 rxrpc_input_data+0x14b/0x1e0 ? rxrpc_input_call_packet+0xc2/0x1f0 rxrpc_input_call_event+0xad/0x6b0 rxrpc_input_packet_on_conn+0x1e1/0x210 rxrpc_input_packet+0x3f2/0x4d0 rxrpc_io_thread+0x243/0x410 ? __pfx_rxrpc_io_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0xcf/0xe0 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x24/0x40 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK>
Impacted products



{
  "configurations": [
    {
      "nodes": [
        {
          "cpeMatch": [
            {
              "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "matchCriteriaId": "5163F80F-8D8E-4FFD-B327-624A8CAF902D",
              "versionEndExcluding": "6.11.9",
              "vulnerable": true
            },
            {
              "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.12:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "matchCriteriaId": "7F361E1D-580F-4A2D-A509-7615F73167A1",
              "vulnerable": true
            },
            {
              "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.12:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "matchCriteriaId": "925478D0-3E3D-4E6F-ACD5-09F28D5DF82C",
              "vulnerable": true
            },
            {
              "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.12:rc3:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "matchCriteriaId": "3C95E234-D335-4B6C-96BF-E2CEBD8654ED",
              "vulnerable": true
            },
            {
              "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.12:rc4:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "matchCriteriaId": "E0F717D8-3014-4F84-8086-0124B2111379",
              "vulnerable": true
            }
          ],
          "negate": false,
          "operator": "OR"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nafs: Fix lock recursion\n\nafs_wake_up_async_call() can incur lock recursion.  The problem is that it\nis called from AF_RXRPC whilst holding the -\u003enotify_lock, but it tries to\ntake a ref on the afs_call struct in order to pass it to a work queue - but\nif the afs_call is already queued, we then have an extraneous ref that must\nbe put... calling afs_put_call() may call back down into AF_RXRPC through\nrxrpc_kernel_shutdown_call(), however, which might try taking the\n-\u003enotify_lock again.\n\nThis case isn\u0027t very common, however, so defer it to a workqueue.  The oops\nlooks something like:\n\n  BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, krxrpcio/7001/1646\n   lock: 0xffff888141399b30, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: krxrpcio/7001/1646, .owner_cpu: 0\n  CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 1646 Comm: krxrpcio/7001 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc2-build3+ #4351\n  Hardware name: ASUS All Series/H97-PLUS, BIOS 2306 10/09/2014\n  Call Trace:\n   \u003cTASK\u003e\n   dump_stack_lvl+0x47/0x70\n   do_raw_spin_lock+0x3c/0x90\n   rxrpc_kernel_shutdown_call+0x83/0xb0\n   afs_put_call+0xd7/0x180\n   rxrpc_notify_socket+0xa0/0x190\n   rxrpc_input_split_jumbo+0x198/0x1d0\n   rxrpc_input_data+0x14b/0x1e0\n   ? rxrpc_input_call_packet+0xc2/0x1f0\n   rxrpc_input_call_event+0xad/0x6b0\n   rxrpc_input_packet_on_conn+0x1e1/0x210\n   rxrpc_input_packet+0x3f2/0x4d0\n   rxrpc_io_thread+0x243/0x410\n   ? __pfx_rxrpc_io_thread+0x10/0x10\n   kthread+0xcf/0xe0\n   ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10\n   ret_from_fork+0x24/0x40\n   ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10\n   ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30\n   \u003c/TASK\u003e"
    },
    {
      "lang": "es",
      "value": "En el kernel de Linux, se ha resuelto la siguiente vulnerabilidad: afs: Fix lock recursion afs_wake_up_async_call() puede generar recursi\u00f3n de bloqueo. El problema es que se llama desde AF_RXRPC mientras se mantiene el -\u0026gt;notify_lock, pero intenta tomar una referencia en la estructura afs_call para pasarla a una cola de trabajo; pero si afs_call ya est\u00e1 en cola, entonces tenemos una referencia extra\u00f1a que se debe poner... sin embargo, llamar a afs_put_call() puede volver a llamar a AF_RXRPC a trav\u00e9s de rxrpc_kernel_shutdown_call(), que podr\u00eda intentar tomar el -\u0026gt;notify_lock nuevamente. Sin embargo, este caso no es muy com\u00fan, por lo que se debe diferir a una cola de trabajo. El error se parece a algo como esto: ERROR: recursi\u00f3n de spinlock en CPU#0, krxrpcio/7001/1646 bloqueo: 0xffff888141399b30, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: krxrpcio/7001/1646, .owner_cpu: 0 CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 1646 Comm: krxrpcio/7001 No contaminado 6.12.0-rc2-build3+ #4351 Nombre del hardware: ASUS All Series/H97-PLUS, BIOS 2306 10/09/2014 Seguimiento de llamadas:  dump_stack_lvl+0x47/0x70 do_raw_spin_lock+0x3c/0x90 rxrpc_input_call_event+0xad/0x6b0 rxrpc_input_packet_on_conn+0x1e1/0x210 rxrpc_input_packet+0x3f2/0x4d0 rxrpc_io_thread+0x243/0x410 ? __pfx_rxrpc_io_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0xcf/0xe0 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_de_la_bifurcaci\u00f3n+0x24/0x40 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_de_la_bifurcaci\u00f3n_asm+0x1a/0x30 "
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2024-53090",
  "lastModified": "2024-12-24T14:52:35.750",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackVector": "LOCAL",
          "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
          "baseScore": 5.5,
          "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
          "confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
          "integrityImpact": "NONE",
          "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 1.8,
        "impactScore": 3.6,
        "source": "nvd@nist.gov",
        "type": "Primary"
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2024-11-21T19:15:12.010",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
      "tags": [
        "Patch"
      ],
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/610a79ffea02102899a1373fe226d949944a7ed6"
    },
    {
      "source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
      "tags": [
        "Patch"
      ],
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d7cbf81df996b1eae2dee8deb6df08e2eba78661"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
  "vulnStatus": "Analyzed",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-674"
        }
      ],
      "source": "nvd@nist.gov",
      "type": "Primary"
    }
  ]
}


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.