CVE-2024-49866
Description
From CVE.org
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tracing/timerlat: Fix a race during cpuhp processing There is another found exception that the "timerlat/1" thread was scheduled on CPU0, and lead to timer corruption finally: ``` ODEBUG: init active (active state 0) object: ffff888237c2e108 object type: hrtimer hint: timerlat_irq+0x0/0x220 WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 426 at lib/debugobjects.c:518 debug_print_object+0x7d/0xb0 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 426 Comm: timerlat/1 Not tainted 6.11.0-rc7+ #45 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.13.0-1ubuntu1.1 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:debug_print_object+0x7d/0xb0 ... Call Trace: <TASK> ? __warn+0x7c/0x110 ? debug_print_object+0x7d/0xb0 ? report_bug+0xf1/0x1d0 ? prb_read_valid+0x17/0x20 ? handle_bug+0x3f/0x70 ? exc_invalid_op+0x13/0x60 ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x16/0x20 ? debug_print_object+0x7d/0xb0 ? debug_print_object+0x7d/0xb0 ? __pfx_timerlat_irq+0x10/0x10 __debug_object_init+0x110/0x150 hrtimer_init+0x1d/0x60 timerlat_main+0xab/0x2d0 ? __pfx_timerlat_main+0x10/0x10 kthread+0xb7/0xe0 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x2d/0x40 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK> ``` After tracing the scheduling event, it was discovered that the migration of the "timerlat/1" thread was performed during thread creation. Further analysis confirmed that it is because the CPU online processing for osnoise is implemented through workers, which is asynchronous with the offline processing. When the worker was scheduled to create a thread, the CPU may has already been removed from the cpu_online_mask during the offline process, resulting in the inability to select the right CPU: T1 | T2 [CPUHP_ONLINE] | cpu_device_down() osnoise_hotplug_workfn() | | cpus_write_lock() | takedown_cpu(1) | cpus_write_unlock() [CPUHP_OFFLINE] | cpus_read_lock() | start_kthread(1) | cpus_read_unlock() | To fix this, skip online processing if the CPU is already offline.
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).
The following CVSS metrics and score provided are preliminary and subject to review.
CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
| Red Hat | NVD | cve.org | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base Score | 4.1 | 4.7 | 7.8 |
| Attack Vector | Local | Local | Local |
| Attack Complexity | High | High | Low |
| Privileges Required | High | Low | Low |
| User Interaction | None | None | None |
| Scope | Unchanged | Unchanged | Unchanged |
| Confidentiality | None | None | High |
| Integrity Impact | None | None | High |
| Availability Impact | High | High | High |
Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
NVD: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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)
Availability
Technical Impact: DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU); DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory); DoS: Resource Consumption (Other)
When a race condition makes it possible to bypass a resource cleanup routine or trigger multiple initialization routines, it may lead to resource exhaustion.
Availability
Technical Impact: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart; DoS: Instability
When a race condition allows multiple control flows to access a resource simultaneously, it might lead the product(s) into unexpected states, possibly resulting in a crash.
Confidentiality,Integrity
Technical Impact: Read Files or Directories; Read Application Data
When a race condition is combined with predictable resource names and loose permissions, it may be possible for an attacker to overwrite or access confidential data (CWE-59).
Access Control
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Gain Privileges or Assume Identity; Bypass Protection Mechanism
This can have security implications when the expected synchronization is in security-critical code, such as recording whether a user is authenticated or modifying important state information that should not be influenced by an outsider.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
