In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ceph: bound xattr value length in __build_xattrs()
__build_xattrs() decodes the MDS-supplied xattr blob one attribute at a
time. For each attribute it reads a 32-bit name length, advances past the
name bytes, reads a 32-bit value length, records the value pointer, and
advances past the value bytes. The two length fields are read with
ceph_decode_32_safe(), but the value bytes themselves are advanced over
with a bare "p += len" and no ceph_decode_need() check that "len" bytes
remain in the blob.
For every attribute except the last, the next iteration's
ceph_decode_32_safe() on the following name length implicitly verifies
that the previous value did not run past the blob end. The final
attribute has no successor, so its decoded value length is never checked
against the blob bounds. A malicious or compromised metadata server can
set the last attribute's value length larger than the bytes actually
present in the blob.
The blob is a dedicated kvmalloc() allocation sized to the wire length
(ceph_buffer_new() in ceph_fill_inode()). __set_xattr() records the
oversized length in xattr->val_len verbatim, and a later getxattr(2) runs
memcpy(value, xattr->val, xattr->val_len) into a user-supplied buffer,
copying bytes past the end of the allocation back to user space.
Impact: a malicious metadata server discloses adjacent kernel heap bytes
to a local user via getxattr(2) on a CephFS file. Add the missing
ceph_decode_need() so an out-of-bounds value length on the final
attribute fails the decode and returns -EIO instead of being stored.
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.
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