7.8

CVE-2022-48649

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

mm/slab_common: fix possible double free of kmem_cache

When doing slub_debug test, kfence's 'test_memcache_typesafe_by_rcu'
kunit test case cause a use-after-free error:

  BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in kobject_del+0x14/0x30
  Read of size 8 at addr ffff888007679090 by task kunit_try_catch/261

  CPU: 1 PID: 261 Comm: kunit_try_catch Tainted: G    B            N 6.0.0-rc5-next-20220916 #17
  Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014
  Call Trace:
   <TASK>
   dump_stack_lvl+0x34/0x48
   print_address_description.constprop.0+0x87/0x2a5
   print_report+0x103/0x1ed
   kasan_report+0xb7/0x140
   kobject_del+0x14/0x30
   kmem_cache_destroy+0x130/0x170
   test_exit+0x1a/0x30
   kunit_try_run_case+0xad/0xc0
   kunit_generic_run_threadfn_adapter+0x26/0x50
   kthread+0x17b/0x1b0
   </TASK>

The cause is inside kmem_cache_destroy():

kmem_cache_destroy
    acquire lock/mutex
    shutdown_cache
        schedule_work(kmem_cache_release) (if RCU flag set)
    release lock/mutex
    kmem_cache_release (if RCU flag not set)

In some certain timing, the scheduled work could be run before
the next RCU flag checking, which can then get a wrong value
and lead to double kmem_cache_release().

Fix it by caching the RCU flag inside protected area, just like 'refcnt'
Daten sind bereitgestellt durch National Vulnerability Database (NVD)
Linux ≫ Linux Kernel Version >= 5.19.8 < 5.19.12
Zu dieser CVE wurde keine CISA KEV oder CERT.AT-Warnung gefunden.
EPSS Metriken
Typ Quelle Score Percentile
EPSS FIRST.org 0.02% 0.032
CVSS Metriken
Quelle Base Score Exploit Score Impact Score Vector String
nvd@nist.gov 7.8 1.8 5.9
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CWE-415 Double Free

The product calls free() twice on the same memory address, potentially leading to modification of unexpected memory locations.

CWE-416 Use After Free

The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory "belongs" to the code that operates on the new pointer.