CVE-2024-50263
Public on
Last Modified:
Description
The CVE Program describes this issue as:
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fork: only invoke khugepaged, ksm hooks if no error There is no reason to invoke these hooks early against an mm that is in an incomplete state. The change in commit d24062914837 ("fork: use __mt_dup() to duplicate maple tree in dup_mmap()") makes this more pertinent as we may be in a state where entries in the maple tree are not yet consistent. Their placement early in dup_mmap() only appears to have been meaningful for early error checking, and since functionally it'd require a very small allocation to fail (in practice 'too small to fail') that'd only occur in the most dire circumstances, meaning the fork would fail or be OOM'd in any case. Since both khugepaged and KSM tracking are there to provide optimisations to memory performance rather than critical functionality, it doesn't really matter all that much if, under such dire memory pressure, we fail to register an mm with these. As a result, we follow the example of commit d2081b2bf819 ("mm: khugepaged: make khugepaged_enter() void function") and make ksm_fork() a void function also. We only expose the mm to these functions once we are done with them and only if no error occurred in the fork operation.
Additional information
- Bugzilla 2325208: kernel: fork: only invoke khugepaged, ksm hooks if no error
- CWE-99: Improper Control of Resource Identifiers ('Resource Injection')
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?
My product is listed as "Under investigation" or "Affected", when will Red Hat release a fix for this vulnerability?
What can I do if my product is listed as "Will not fix"?
What can I do if my product is listed as "Fix deferred"?
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.