In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
lib/alloc_tag: do not acquire non-existent lock in alloc_tag_top_users()
alloc_tag_top_users() attempts to lock alloc_tag_cttype->mod_lock even
when the alloc_tag_cttype is not allocated because:
1) alloc tagging is disabled because mem profiling is disabled
(!alloc_tag_cttype)
2) alloc tagging is enabled, but not yet initialized (!alloc_tag_cttype)
3) alloc tagging is enabled, but failed initialization
(!alloc_tag_cttype or IS_ERR(alloc_tag_cttype))
In all cases, alloc_tag_cttype is not allocated, and therefore
alloc_tag_top_users() should not attempt to acquire the semaphore.
This leads to a crash on memory allocation failure by attempting to
acquire a non-existent semaphore:
Oops: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0xdffffc000000001b: 0000 [#3] SMP KASAN NOPTI
KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x00000000000000d8-0x00000000000000df]
CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 1 Comm: systemd Tainted: G D 6.16.0-rc2 #1 VOLUNTARY
Tainted: [D]=DIE
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.2-debian-1.16.2-1 04/01/2014
RIP: 0010:down_read_trylock+0xaa/0x3b0
Code: d0 7c 08 84 d2 0f 85 a0 02 00 00 8b 0d df 31 dd 04 85 c9 75 29 48 b8 00 00 00 00 00 fc ff df 48 8d 6b 68 48 89 ea 48 c1 ea 03 <80> 3c 02 00 0f 85 88 02 00 00 48 3b 5b 68 0f 85 53 01 00 00 65 ff
RSP: 0000:ffff8881002ce9b8 EFLAGS: 00010016
RAX: dffffc0000000000 RBX: 0000000000000070 RCX: 0000000000000000
RDX: 000000000000001b RSI: 000000000000000a RDI: 0000000000000070
RBP: 00000000000000d8 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffffed107dde49d1
R10: ffff8883eef24e8b R11: ffff8881002cec20 R12: 1ffff11020059d37
R13: 00000000003fff7b R14: ffff8881002cec20 R15: dffffc0000000000
FS: 00007f963f21d940(0000) GS:ffff888458ca6000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 00007f963f5edf71 CR3: 000000010672c000 CR4: 0000000000350ef0
Call Trace:
codetag_trylock_module_list+0xd/0x20
alloc_tag_top_users+0x369/0x4b0
__show_mem+0x1cd/0x6e0
warn_alloc+0x2b1/0x390
__alloc_frozen_pages_noprof+0x12b9/0x21a0
alloc_pages_mpol+0x135/0x3e0
alloc_slab_page+0x82/0xe0
new_slab+0x212/0x240
___slab_alloc+0x82a/0xe00
As David Wang points out, this issue became easier to trigger after commit
780138b12381 ("alloc_tag: check mem_profiling_support in alloc_tag_init").
Before the commit, the issue occurred only when it failed to allocate and
initialize alloc_tag_cttype or if a memory allocation fails before
alloc_tag_init() is called. After the commit, it can be easily triggered
when memory profiling is compiled but disabled at boot.
To properly determine whether alloc_tag_init() has been called and its
data structures initialized, verify that alloc_tag_cttype is a valid
pointer before acquiring the semaphore. If the variable is NULL or an
error value, it has not been properly initialized. In such a case, just
skip and do not attempt to acquire the semaphore.
[[email protected]: v3]
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it