ghsa-v5hm-gx5h-94jm
Vulnerability from github
Published
2024-12-24 12:30
Modified
2025-01-07 18:30
Details

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

wifi: ath9k: add range check for conn_rsp_epid in htc_connect_service()

I found the following bug in my fuzzer:

UBSAN: array-index-out-of-bounds in drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_hst.c:26:51 index 255 is out of range for type 'htc_endpoint [22]' CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 8 Comm: kworker/0:0 Not tainted 6.11.0-rc6-dirty #14 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014 Workqueue: events request_firmware_work_func Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl+0x180/0x1b0 __ubsan_handle_out_of_bounds+0xd4/0x130 htc_issue_send.constprop.0+0x20c/0x230 ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x3c/0x70 ath9k_wmi_cmd+0x41d/0x610 ? mark_held_locks+0x9f/0xe0 ...

Since this bug has been confirmed to be caused by insufficient verification of conn_rsp_epid, I think it would be appropriate to add a range check for conn_rsp_epid to htc_connect_service() to prevent the bug from occurring.

Show details on source website


{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-53156"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-129"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-12-24T12:15:23Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nwifi: ath9k: add range check for conn_rsp_epid in htc_connect_service()\n\nI found the following bug in my fuzzer:\n\n  UBSAN: array-index-out-of-bounds in drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc_hst.c:26:51\n  index 255 is out of range for type \u0027htc_endpoint [22]\u0027\n  CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 8 Comm: kworker/0:0 Not tainted 6.11.0-rc6-dirty #14\n  Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014\n  Workqueue: events request_firmware_work_func\n  Call Trace:\n   \u003cTASK\u003e\n   dump_stack_lvl+0x180/0x1b0\n   __ubsan_handle_out_of_bounds+0xd4/0x130\n   htc_issue_send.constprop.0+0x20c/0x230\n   ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x3c/0x70\n   ath9k_wmi_cmd+0x41d/0x610\n   ? mark_held_locks+0x9f/0xe0\n   ...\n\nSince this bug has been confirmed to be caused by insufficient verification\nof conn_rsp_epid, I think it would be appropriate to add a range check for\nconn_rsp_epid to htc_connect_service() to prevent the bug from occurring.",
  "id": "GHSA-v5hm-gx5h-94jm",
  "modified": "2025-01-07T18:30:47Z",
  "published": "2024-12-24T12:30:43Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-53156"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/3fe99b9690b99606d3743c9961ebee865cfa1ab8"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/5f177fb9d01355ac183e65ad8909ea8ef734e0cf"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/70eae50d2156cb6e078d0d78809b49bf2f4c7540"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/8619593634cbdf5abf43f5714df49b04e4ef09ab"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/8965db7fe2e913ee0802b05fc94c6d6aa74e0596"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/b6551479daf2bfa80bfd5d9016b02a810e508bfb"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/bc981179ab5d1a2715f35e3db4e4bb822bacc849"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c941af142200d975dd3be632aeb490f4cb91dae4"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/cb480ae80fd4d0f1ac9e107ce799183beee5124b"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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.