CVE-2022-49520

Public on

Last Modified: UTC

DescriptionAdditional informationAffected PackagesCVSS Score DetailsFAQ

Description

The CVE Program describes this issue as:

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: arm64: compat: Do not treat syscall number as ESR_ELx for a bad syscall If a compat process tries to execute an unknown system call above the __ARM_NR_COMPAT_END number, the kernel sends a SIGILL signal to the offending process. Information about the error is printed to dmesg in compat_arm_syscall() -> arm64_notify_die() -> arm64_force_sig_fault() -> arm64_show_signal(). arm64_show_signal() interprets a non-zero value for current->thread.fault_code as an exception syndrome and displays the message associated with the ESR_ELx.EC field (bits 31:26). current->thread.fault_code is set in compat_arm_syscall() -> arm64_notify_die() with the bad syscall number instead of a valid ESR_ELx value. This means that the ESR_ELx.EC field has the value that the user set for the syscall number and the kernel can end up printing bogus exception messages*. For example, for the syscall number 0x68000000, which evaluates to ESR_ELx.EC value of 0x1A (ESR_ELx_EC_FPAC) the kernel prints this error: [ 18.349161] syscall[300]: unhandled exception: ERET/ERETAA/ERETAB, ESR 0x68000000, Oops - bad compat syscall(2) in syscall[10000+50000] [ 18.350639] CPU: 2 PID: 300 Comm: syscall Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1 #79 [ 18.351249] Hardware name: Pine64 RockPro64 v2.0 (DT) [..] which is misleading, as the bad compat syscall has nothing to do with pointer authentication. Stop arm64_show_signal() from printing exception syndrome information by having compat_arm_syscall() set the ESR_ELx value to 0, as it has no meaning for an invalid system call number. The example above now becomes: [ 19.935275] syscall[301]: unhandled exception: Oops - bad compat syscall(2) in syscall[10000+50000] [ 19.936124] CPU: 1 PID: 301 Comm: syscall Not tainted 5.18.0-rc1-00005-g7e08006d4102 #80 [ 19.936894] Hardware name: Pine64 RockPro64 v2.0 (DT) [..] which although shows less information because the syscall number, wrongfully advertised as the ESR value, is missing, it is better than showing plainly wrong information. The syscall number can be easily obtained with strace. *A 32-bit value above or equal to 0x8000_0000 is interpreted as a negative integer in compat_arm_syscal() and the condition scno < __ARM_NR_COMPAT_END evaluates to true; the syscall will exit to userspace in this case with the ENOSYS error code instead of arm64_notify_die() being called.

Additional information

  • Bugzilla 2347923: kernel: arm64: compat: Do not treat syscall number as ESR_ELx for a bad syscall

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.

CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
Red HatNVD

CVSS v3 Base Score

5.5

N/A

Attack Vector

Local

N/A

Attack Complexity

Low

N/A

Privileges Required

Low

N/A

User Interaction

None

N/A

Scope

Unchanged

N/A

Confidentiality Impact

None

N/A

Integrity Impact

None

N/A

Availability Impact

High

N/A

CVSS v3 Vector

Red Hat: 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 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.
  • 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"?

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.

My product is listed as "Out of Support Scope". What does this mean?

When a product is listed as "Out of Support Scope", it means a vulnerability with the impact level assigned to this CVE is no longer covered by its current support lifecycle phase. The product has been identified to contain the impacted component, but analysis to determine whether it is affected or not by this vulnerability was not performed. The product should be assumed to be affected. Customers are advised to apply any mitigation options documented on this page, consider removing or disabling the impacted component, or upgrade to a supported version of the product that has an update available.

Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.