CVE-2024-47689
Public on
Last Modified:
Description
The CVE Program describes this issue as:
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: f2fs: fix to don't set SB_RDONLY in f2fs_handle_critical_error() syzbot reports a f2fs bug as below: ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 58 at kernel/rcu/sync.c:177 rcu_sync_dtor+0xcd/0x180 kernel/rcu/sync.c:177 CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 58 Comm: kworker/1:2 Not tainted 6.10.0-syzkaller-12562-g1722389b0d86 #0 Workqueue: events destroy_super_work RIP: 0010:rcu_sync_dtor+0xcd/0x180 kernel/rcu/sync.c:177 Call Trace: percpu_free_rwsem+0x41/0x80 kernel/locking/percpu-rwsem.c:42 destroy_super_work+0xec/0x130 fs/super.c:282 process_one_work kernel/workqueue.c:3231 [inline] process_scheduled_works+0xa2c/0x1830 kernel/workqueue.c:3312 worker_thread+0x86d/0xd40 kernel/workqueue.c:3390 kthread+0x2f0/0x390 kernel/kthread.c:389 ret_from_fork+0x4b/0x80 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:147 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:244 As Christian Brauner pointed out [1]: the root cause is f2fs sets SB_RDONLY flag in internal function, rather than setting the flag covered w/ sb->s_umount semaphore via remount procedure, then below race condition causes this bug: - freeze_super() - sb_wait_write(sb, SB_FREEZE_WRITE) - sb_wait_write(sb, SB_FREEZE_PAGEFAULT) - sb_wait_write(sb, SB_FREEZE_FS) - f2fs_handle_critical_error - sb->s_flags |= SB_RDONLY - thaw_super - thaw_super_locked - sb_rdonly() is true, so it skips sb_freeze_unlock(sb, SB_FREEZE_FS) - deactivate_locked_super Since f2fs has almost the same logic as ext4 [2] when handling critical error in filesystem if it mounts w/ errors=remount-ro option: - set CP_ERROR_FLAG flag which indicates filesystem is stopped - record errors to superblock - set SB_RDONLY falg Once we set CP_ERROR_FLAG flag, all writable interfaces can detect the flag and stop any further updates on filesystem. So, it is safe to not set SB_RDONLY flag, let's remove the logic and keep in line w/ ext4 [3]. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240729-himbeeren-funknetz-96e62f9c7aee@brauner [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240729132721.hxih6ehigadqf7wx@quack3 [3] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/20240805201241.27286-1-jack@suse.cz
Additional information
- Bugzilla 2320261: kernel: f2fs: fix to don't set SB_RDONLY in f2fs_handle_critical_error()
- CWE-362: Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')
- FAQ: Frequently asked questions about CVE-2024-47689
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 | 5.3 | 5.3 |
Attack Vector | Network | Network |
Attack Complexity | High | High |
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:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
NVD: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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 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"?
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.
