CVE-2024-50161
Description
From CVE.org
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Check the remaining info_cnt before repeating btf fields When trying to repeat the btf fields for array of nested struct, it doesn't check the remaining info_cnt. The following splat will be reported when the value of ret * nelems is greater than BTF_FIELDS_MAX: ------------[ cut here ]------------ UBSAN: array-index-out-of-bounds in ../kernel/bpf/btf.c:3951:49 index 11 is out of range for type 'btf_field_info [11]' CPU: 6 UID: 0 PID: 411 Comm: test_progs ...... 6.11.0-rc4+ #1 Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS ... Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x57/0x70 dump_stack+0x10/0x20 ubsan_epilogue+0x9/0x40 __ubsan_handle_out_of_bounds+0x6f/0x80 ? kallsyms_lookup_name+0x48/0xb0 btf_parse_fields+0x992/0xce0 map_create+0x591/0x770 __sys_bpf+0x229/0x2410 __x64_sys_bpf+0x1f/0x30 x64_sys_call+0x199/0x9f0 do_syscall_64+0x3b/0xc0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53 RIP: 0033:0x7fea56f2cc5d ...... </TASK> ---[ end trace ]--- Fix it by checking the remaining info_cnt in btf_repeat_fields() before repeating the btf fields.
Statement
The default Red Hat Enterprise Linux kernel prevents unprivileged users from being able to use eBPF by the kernel.unprivileged_bpf_disabled sysctl. This would require a privileged user with CAP_SYS_ADMIN or root to be able to abuse this flaw reducing its attack space.
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 | 4.4 | 5.5 | 7.8 |
| Attack Vector | Local | Local | Local |
| Attack Complexity | Low | Low | 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:L/PR:H/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
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,Confidentiality,Availability
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Modify Memory
If the memory accessible by the attacker can be effectively controlled, it may be possible to execute arbitrary code, as with a standard buffer overflow. If the attacker can overwrite a pointer's worth of memory (usually 32 or 64 bits), they can alter the intended control flow by redirecting a function pointer to their own malicious code. Even when the attacker can only modify a single byte arbitrary code execution can be possible. Sometimes this is because the same problem can be exploited repeatedly to the same effect. Other times it is because the attacker can overwrite security-critical application-specific data -- such as a flag indicating whether the user is an administrator.
Availability,Confidentiality
Technical Impact: Read Memory; DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart; DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU); DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)
Out of bounds memory access will very likely result in the corruption of relevant memory, and perhaps instructions, possibly leading to a crash. Other attacks leading to lack of availability are possible, including putting the program into an infinite loop.
Confidentiality
Technical Impact: Read Memory
In the case of an out-of-bounds read, the attacker may have access to sensitive information. If the sensitive information contains system details, such as the current buffer's position in memory, this knowledge can be used to craft further attacks, possibly with more severe consequences.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
