CVE-2024-26782

Public on

Last Modified: UTC

Description

The CVE Program describes this issue as:

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mptcp: fix double-free on socket dismantle when MPTCP server accepts an incoming connection, it clones its listener socket. However, the pointer to 'inet_opt' for the new socket has the same value as the original one: as a consequence, on program exit it's possible to observe the following splat: BUG: KASAN: double-free in inet_sock_destruct+0x54f/0x8b0 Free of addr ffff888485950880 by task swapper/25/0 CPU: 25 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/25 Kdump: loaded Not tainted 6.8.0-rc1+ #609 Hardware name: Supermicro SYS-6027R-72RF/X9DRH-7TF/7F/iTF/iF, BIOS 3.0 07/26/2013 Call Trace: <IRQ> dump_stack_lvl+0x32/0x50 print_report+0xca/0x620 kasan_report_invalid_free+0x64/0x90 __kasan_slab_free+0x1aa/0x1f0 kfree+0xed/0x2e0 inet_sock_destruct+0x54f/0x8b0 __sk_destruct+0x48/0x5b0 rcu_do_batch+0x34e/0xd90 rcu_core+0x559/0xac0 __do_softirq+0x183/0x5a4 irq_exit_rcu+0x12d/0x170 sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0x6b/0x80 </IRQ> <TASK> asm_sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0x16/0x20 RIP: 0010:cpuidle_enter_state+0x175/0x300 Code: 30 00 0f 84 1f 01 00 00 83 e8 01 83 f8 ff 75 e5 48 83 c4 18 44 89 e8 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41 5e 41 5f c3 cc cc cc cc fb 45 85 ed <0f> 89 60 ff ff ff 48 c1 e5 06 48 c7 43 18 00 00 00 00 48 83 44 2b RSP: 0018:ffff888481cf7d90 EFLAGS: 00000202 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff88887facddc8 RCX: 0000000000000000 RDX: 1ffff1110ff588b1 RSI: 0000000000000019 RDI: ffff88887fac4588 RBP: 0000000000000004 R08: 0000000000000002 R09: 0000000000043080 R10: 0009b02ea273363f R11: ffff88887fabf42b R12: ffffffff932592e0 R13: 0000000000000004 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 00000022c880ec80 cpuidle_enter+0x4a/0xa0 do_idle+0x310/0x410 cpu_startup_entry+0x51/0x60 start_secondary+0x211/0x270 secondary_startup_64_no_verify+0x184/0x18b </TASK> Allocated by task 6853: kasan_save_stack+0x1c/0x40 kasan_save_track+0x10/0x30 __kasan_kmalloc+0xa6/0xb0 __kmalloc+0x1eb/0x450 cipso_v4_sock_setattr+0x96/0x360 netlbl_sock_setattr+0x132/0x1f0 selinux_netlbl_socket_post_create+0x6c/0x110 selinux_socket_post_create+0x37b/0x7f0 security_socket_post_create+0x63/0xb0 __sock_create+0x305/0x450 __sys_socket_create.part.23+0xbd/0x130 __sys_socket+0x37/0xb0 __x64_sys_socket+0x6f/0xb0 do_syscall_64+0x83/0x160 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6e/0x76 Freed by task 6858: kasan_save_stack+0x1c/0x40 kasan_save_track+0x10/0x30 kasan_save_free_info+0x3b/0x60 __kasan_slab_free+0x12c/0x1f0 kfree+0xed/0x2e0 inet_sock_destruct+0x54f/0x8b0 __sk_destruct+0x48/0x5b0 subflow_ulp_release+0x1f0/0x250 tcp_cleanup_ulp+0x6e/0x110 tcp_v4_destroy_sock+0x5a/0x3a0 inet_csk_destroy_sock+0x135/0x390 tcp_fin+0x416/0x5c0 tcp_data_queue+0x1bc8/0x4310 tcp_rcv_state_process+0x15a3/0x47b0 tcp_v4_do_rcv+0x2c1/0x990 tcp_v4_rcv+0x41fb/0x5ed0 ip_protocol_deliver_rcu+0x6d/0x9f0 ip_local_deliver_finish+0x278/0x360 ip_local_deliver+0x182/0x2c0 ip_rcv+0xb5/0x1c0 __netif_receive_skb_one_core+0x16e/0x1b0 process_backlog+0x1e3/0x650 __napi_poll+0xa6/0x500 net_rx_action+0x740/0xbb0 __do_softirq+0x183/0x5a4 The buggy address belongs to the object at ffff888485950880 which belongs to the cache kmalloc-64 of size 64 The buggy address is located 0 bytes inside of 64-byte region [ffff888485950880, ffff8884859508c0) The buggy address belongs to the physical page: page:0000000056d1e95e refcount:1 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0xffff888485950700 pfn:0x485950 flags: 0x57ffffc0000800(slab|node=1|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1fffff) page_type: 0xffffffff() raw: 0057ffffc0000800 ffff88810004c640 ffffea00121b8ac0 dead000000000006 raw: ffff888485950700 0000000000200019 00000001ffffffff 0000000000000000 page dumped because: kasan: bad access detected Memory state around the buggy address: ffff888485950780: fa fb fb ---truncated---

Additional information

  • Bugzilla 2273468: kernel: mptcp: fix double-free on socket dismantle
  • FAQ: Frequently asked questions about CVE-2024-26782

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).

CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
Red HatNVD

CVSS v3 Base Score

4.7

7.8

Attack Vector

Local

Local

Attack Complexity

High

Low

Privileges Required

Low

Low

User Interaction

None

None

Scope

Unchanged

Unchanged

Confidentiality Impact

None

High

Integrity Impact

None

High

Availability Impact

High

High

CVSS v3 Vector

Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/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:H/I:H/A:H

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is Red Hat's CVSS v3 score or Impact different from other vendors?

For open source software shipped by multiple vendors, the CVSS base scores may vary for each vendor's version depending on the version they ship, how they ship it, the platform, and even how the software is compiled. This makes scoring of vulnerabilities difficult for third-party vulnerability databases such as NVD that only provide a single CVSS base score for each vulnerability. Red Hat scores reflect how a vulnerability affects our products specifically.

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.
  • "Affected" means that our Analysis Team has determined that this product is affected by this vulnerability and might release a fix to address this in the near future.

What can I do if my product is listed as "Will not fix"?

A "will not fix" status means that a fix for an affected product version is not planned or not possible due to complexity, which may create additional risk.

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"?

A deferred status means that a fix for an affected product version is not guaranteed due to higher-priority development work.

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?

A mitigation is an action that can be taken to reduce the impact of a security vulnerability, without deploying any fixes.

I have a Red Hat product but it is not in the above list, is it affected?

The listed products were found to include one or more of the components that this vulnerability affects. These products underwent a thorough evaluation to determine their affectedness by this vulnerability. Note that layered products (such as container-based offerings) that consume affected components from any of the products listed in this table may be affected and are not represented.

Why is my security scanner reporting my product as vulnerable to this vulnerability even though my product version is fixed or not affected?

In order to maintain code stability and compatibility, Red Hat usually does not rebase packages to entirely new versions. Instead, we backport fixes and new features to an older version of the package we distribute. This can result in some security scanners that only consider the package version to report the package as vulnerable. To avoid this, we suggest that you use an approved vulnerability scanner from our Red Hat Vulnerability Scanner Certification program.

Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.