CVE-2021-47505
Description
From CVE.org
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: aio: fix use-after-free due to missing POLLFREE handling signalfd_poll() and binder_poll() are special in that they use a waitqueue whose lifetime is the current task, rather than the struct file as is normally the case. This is okay for blocking polls, since a blocking poll occurs within one task; however, non-blocking polls require another solution. This solution is for the queue to be cleared before it is freed, by sending a POLLFREE notification to all waiters. Unfortunately, only eventpoll handles POLLFREE. A second type of non-blocking poll, aio poll, was added in kernel v4.18, and it doesn't handle POLLFREE. This allows a use-after-free to occur if a signalfd or binder fd is polled with aio poll, and the waitqueue gets freed. Fix this by making aio poll handle POLLFREE. A patch by Ramji Jiyani <ramjiyani@google.com> (https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211027011834.2497484-1-ramjiyani@google.com) tried to do this by making aio_poll_wake() always complete the request inline if POLLFREE is seen. However, that solution had two bugs. First, it introduced a deadlock, as it unconditionally locked the aio context while holding the waitqueue lock, which inverts the normal locking order. Second, it didn't consider that POLLFREE notifications are missed while the request has been temporarily de-queued. The second problem was solved by my previous patch. This patch then properly fixes the use-after-free by handling POLLFREE in a deadlock-free way. It does this by taking advantage of the fact that freeing of the waitqueue is RCU-delayed, similar to what eventpoll does.
Statement
Following issue marked as moderate with "not affected" for Red Hat Enterprise Linux, as it is not vulnerable to this CVE. This is because the CVE does not impact the versions or configurations of the Linux kernel used in Red Hat's distributions. Additionally, some RHEL versions may be marked as "will not fix" due to the minimal impact of the issue, and no fix will be provided.
Mitigation
Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base or stability.
Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details
Info alert:Important note
CVSS scores for open source components depend on vendor-specific factors (e.g. version or build chain). Therefore, Red Hat's score and impact rating can be different from NVD and other vendors. Red Hat remains the authoritative CVE Naming Authority (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications).
CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
| Red Hat | NVD | cve.org | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base Score | 6.6 | 7.8 | 7.8 |
| Attack Vector | Local | Local | Local |
| Attack Complexity | Low | Low | Low |
| Privileges Required | Low | Low | Low |
| User Interaction | None | None | None |
| Scope | Unchanged | Unchanged | Unchanged |
| Confidentiality | Low | High | High |
| Integrity Impact | Low | High | High |
| Availability Impact | High | High | High |
Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
NVD: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cve.org: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Integrity
Technical Impact: Modify Memory
The use of previously freed memory may corrupt valid data, if the memory area in question has been allocated and used properly elsewhere.
Availability
Technical Impact: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart
If chunk consolidation occurs after the use of previously freed data, the process may crash when invalid data is used as chunk information.
Confidentiality
Technical Impact: Read Memory
Read operations on freed memory can sometimes leak sensitive information instead of causing a crash
Integrity,Confidentiality,Availability
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands
If malicious data is entered before chunk consolidation can take place, it may be possible to take advantage of a write-what-where primitive to execute arbitrary code. If the newly allocated data happens to hold a class, in C++ for example, various function pointers may be scattered within the heap data. If one of these function pointers is overwritten with an address to valid shellcode, execution of arbitrary code can be achieved.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
