CVE-2024-39510
Public on
Last Modified:
Description
The CVE Program describes this issue as:
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: cachefiles: fix slab-use-after-free in cachefiles_ondemand_daemon_read() We got the following issue in a fuzz test of randomly issuing the restore command: ================================================================== BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in cachefiles_ondemand_daemon_read+0xb41/0xb60 Read of size 8 at addr ffff888122e84088 by task ondemand-04-dae/963 CPU: 13 PID: 963 Comm: ondemand-04-dae Not tainted 6.8.0-dirty #564 Call Trace: kasan_report+0x93/0xc0 cachefiles_ondemand_daemon_read+0xb41/0xb60 vfs_read+0x169/0xb50 ksys_read+0xf5/0x1e0 Allocated by task 116: kmem_cache_alloc+0x140/0x3a0 cachefiles_lookup_cookie+0x140/0xcd0 fscache_cookie_state_machine+0x43c/0x1230 [...] Freed by task 792: kmem_cache_free+0xfe/0x390 cachefiles_put_object+0x241/0x480 fscache_cookie_state_machine+0x5c8/0x1230 [...] ================================================================== Following is the process that triggers the issue: mount | daemon_thread1 | daemon_thread2 ------------------------------------------------------------ cachefiles_withdraw_cookie cachefiles_ondemand_clean_object(object) cachefiles_ondemand_send_req REQ_A = kzalloc(sizeof(*req) + data_len) wait_for_completion(&REQ_A->done) cachefiles_daemon_read cachefiles_ondemand_daemon_read REQ_A = cachefiles_ondemand_select_req msg->object_id = req->object->ondemand->ondemand_id ------ restore ------ cachefiles_ondemand_restore xas_for_each(&xas, req, ULONG_MAX) xas_set_mark(&xas, CACHEFILES_REQ_NEW) cachefiles_daemon_read cachefiles_ondemand_daemon_read REQ_A = cachefiles_ondemand_select_req copy_to_user(_buffer, msg, n) xa_erase(&cache->reqs, id) complete(&REQ_A->done) ------ close(fd) ------ cachefiles_ondemand_fd_release cachefiles_put_object cachefiles_put_object kmem_cache_free(cachefiles_object_jar, object) REQ_A->object->ondemand->ondemand_id // object UAF !!! When we see the request within xa_lock, req->object must not have been freed yet, so grab the reference count of object before xa_unlock to avoid the above issue.
Statement
Mitigation
Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base or stability.
Additional information
- Bugzilla 2297482: kernel: cachefiles: fix slab-use-after-free in cachefiles_ondemand_daemon_read()
- CWE-416: Use After Free
- FAQ: Frequently asked questions about CVE-2024-39510
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 | 7.8 | 7.8 |
Attack Vector | Local | Local |
Attack Complexity | Low | Low |
Privileges Required | Low | Low |
User Interaction | None | None |
Scope | Unchanged | Unchanged |
Confidentiality Impact | High | High |
Integrity Impact | High | High |
Availability Impact | High | High |
CVSS v3 Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 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"?
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"?
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?
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?
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.