CVE-2022-49567
Public on
Last Modified:
Description
The CVE Program describes this issue as:
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/mempolicy: fix uninit-value in mpol_rebind_policy() mpol_set_nodemask()(mm/mempolicy.c) does not set up nodemask when pol->mode is MPOL_LOCAL. Check pol->mode before access pol->w.cpuset_mems_allowed in mpol_rebind_policy()(mm/mempolicy.c). BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in mpol_rebind_policy mm/mempolicy.c:352 [inline] BUG: KMSAN: uninit-value in mpol_rebind_task+0x2ac/0x2c0 mm/mempolicy.c:368 mpol_rebind_policy mm/mempolicy.c:352 [inline] mpol_rebind_task+0x2ac/0x2c0 mm/mempolicy.c:368 cpuset_change_task_nodemask kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c:1711 [inline] cpuset_attach+0x787/0x15e0 kernel/cgroup/cpuset.c:2278 cgroup_migrate_execute+0x1023/0x1d20 kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c:2515 cgroup_migrate kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c:2771 [inline] cgroup_attach_task+0x540/0x8b0 kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c:2804 __cgroup1_procs_write+0x5cc/0x7a0 kernel/cgroup/cgroup-v1.c:520 cgroup1_tasks_write+0x94/0xb0 kernel/cgroup/cgroup-v1.c:539 cgroup_file_write+0x4c2/0x9e0 kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c:3852 kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x66a/0x9f0 fs/kernfs/file.c:296 call_write_iter include/linux/fs.h:2162 [inline] new_sync_write fs/read_write.c:503 [inline] vfs_write+0x1318/0x2030 fs/read_write.c:590 ksys_write+0x28b/0x510 fs/read_write.c:643 __do_sys_write fs/read_write.c:655 [inline] __se_sys_write fs/read_write.c:652 [inline] __x64_sys_write+0xdb/0x120 fs/read_write.c:652 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:51 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x54/0xd0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:82 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae Uninit was created at: slab_post_alloc_hook mm/slab.h:524 [inline] slab_alloc_node mm/slub.c:3251 [inline] slab_alloc mm/slub.c:3259 [inline] kmem_cache_alloc+0x902/0x11c0 mm/slub.c:3264 mpol_new mm/mempolicy.c:293 [inline] do_set_mempolicy+0x421/0xb70 mm/mempolicy.c:853 kernel_set_mempolicy mm/mempolicy.c:1504 [inline] __do_sys_set_mempolicy mm/mempolicy.c:1510 [inline] __se_sys_set_mempolicy+0x44c/0xb60 mm/mempolicy.c:1507 __x64_sys_set_mempolicy+0xd8/0x110 mm/mempolicy.c:1507 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:51 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x54/0xd0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:82 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae KMSAN: uninit-value in mpol_rebind_task (2) https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=d6eb90f952c2a5de9ea718a1b873c55cb13b59dc This patch seems to fix below bug too. KMSAN: uninit-value in mpol_rebind_mm (2) https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=f2fecd0d7013f54ec4162f60743a2b28df40926b The uninit-value is pol->w.cpuset_mems_allowed in mpol_rebind_policy(). When syzkaller reproducer runs to the beginning of mpol_new(), mpol_new() mm/mempolicy.c do_mbind() mm/mempolicy.c kernel_mbind() mm/mempolicy.c `mode` is 1(MPOL_PREFERRED), nodes_empty(*nodes) is `true` and `flags` is 0. Then mode = MPOL_LOCAL; ... policy->mode = mode; policy->flags = flags; will be executed. So in mpol_set_nodemask(), mpol_set_nodemask() mm/mempolicy.c do_mbind() kernel_mbind() pol->mode is 4 (MPOL_LOCAL), that `nodemask` in `pol` is not initialized, which will be accessed in mpol_rebind_policy().
Additional information
- Bugzilla 2347961: kernel: mm/mempolicy: fix uninit-value in mpol_rebind_policy()
- CWE-908: Use of Uninitialized Resource
Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details
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).
The following CVSS metrics and score provided are preliminary and subject to review.
Red Hat | NVD | |
---|---|---|
CVSS v3 Base Score | 5.5 | 5.5 |
Attack Vector | Local | Local |
Attack Complexity | Low | Low |
Privileges Required | Low | Low |
User Interaction | None | None |
Scope | Unchanged | Unchanged |
Confidentiality Impact | None | None |
Integrity Impact | None | None |
Availability Impact | High | High |
CVSS v3 Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
NVD: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is Red Hat's CVSS v3 score or Impact different from other vendors?
For more information, see https://access.redhat.com/solutions/762393.
My product is listed as "Under investigation" or "Affected", when will Red Hat release a fix for this vulnerability?
- "Under investigation" doesn't necessarily mean that the product is affected by this vulnerability. It only means that our Analysis Team is still working on determining whether the product is affected and how it is affected.
- The term "Affected" means that our Analysis team has determined that this product, such as Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 or OpenShift Container Platform 4, is affected by this vulnerability and a fix may be released to address this issue in the near future. This includes all minor releases of this product unless noted otherwise in the Statement text.
What can I do if my product is listed as "Will not fix"?
Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
- Upgrade to a supported product version that includes a fix for this vulnerability (recommended).
- Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
- Open a support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.
What can I do if my product is listed as "Fix deferred"?
Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
- Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
- Open a support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.
- Red Hat Engineering focuses on addressing high-priority issues based on their complexity or limited lifecycle support. Therefore, lower-priority issues will not receive immediate fixes.
What is a mitigation?
I have a Red Hat product but it is not in the above list, is it affected?
Why is my security scanner reporting my product as vulnerable to this vulnerability even though my product version is fixed or not affected?
My product is listed as "Out of Support Scope". What does this mean?
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.