Linux Kernel up to 5.12/6.6.13/6.7.1 BPF check_stack_slot_within_bounds uninitialized pointer

| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 5.3 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability was found in Linux Kernel up to 5.12/6.6.13/6.7.1 and classified as problematic. Affected by this issue is the function check_stack_slot_within_bounds of the component BPF. Such manipulation leads to uninitialized pointer.
This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2023-52452. No exploit exists.
It is suggested to upgrade the affected component.
Details
A vulnerability was found in Linux Kernel up to 5.12/6.6.13/6.7.1 (Operating System) and classified as problematic. Affected by this issue is the function check_stack_slot_within_bounds of the component BPF. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a uninitialized pointer vulnerability. Using CWE to declare the problem leads to CWE-824. The product accesses or uses a pointer that has not been initialized. The impact remains unknown. CVE summarizes:
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Fix accesses to uninit stack slots Privileged programs are supposed to be able to read uninitialized stack memory (ever since 6715df8d5) but, before this patch, these accesses were permitted inconsistently. In particular, accesses were permitted above state->allocated_stack, but not below it. In other words, if the stack was already "large enough", the access was permitted, but otherwise the access was rejected instead of being allowed to "grow the stack". This undesired rejection was happening in two places: - in check_stack_slot_within_bounds() - in check_stack_range_initialized() This patch arranges for these accesses to be permitted. A bunch of tests that were relying on the old rejection had to change; all of them were changed to add also run unprivileged, in which case the old behavior persists. One tests couldn't be updated - global_func16 - because it can't run unprivileged for other reasons. This patch also fixes the tracking of the stack size for variable-offset reads. This second fix is bundled in the same commit as the first one because they're inter-related. Before this patch, writes to the stack using registers containing a variable offset (as opposed to registers with fixed, known values) were not properly contributing to the function's needed stack size. As a result, it was possible for a program to verify, but then to attempt to read out-of-bounds data at runtime because a too small stack had been allocated for it. Each function tracks the size of the stack it needs in bpf_subprog_info.stack_depth, which is maintained by update_stack_depth(). For regular memory accesses, check_mem_access() was calling update_state_depth() but it was passing in only the fixed part of the offset register, ignoring the variable offset. This was incorrect; the minimum possible value of that register should be used instead. This tracking is now fixed by centralizing the tracking of stack size in grow_stack_state(), and by lifting the calls to grow_stack_state() to check_stack_access_within_bounds() as suggested by Andrii. The code is now simpler and more convincingly tracks the correct maximum stack size. check_stack_range_initialized() can now rely on enough stack having been allocated for the access; this helps with the fix for the first issue. A few tests were changed to also check the stack depth computation. The one that fails without this patch is verifier_var_off:stack_write_priv_vs_unpriv.
The weakness was disclosed 02/22/2024. The advisory is shared for download at git.kernel.org. This vulnerability is handled as CVE-2023-52452 since 02/20/2024. There are known technical details, but no exploit is available.
Upgrading to version 5.12, 6.6.14, 6.7.2 or 6.8-rc1 eliminates this vulnerability. Applying the patch 6b4a64bafd10/0954982db828/fbcf372c8eda is able to eliminate this problem. The bugfix is ready for download at git.kernel.org. The best possible mitigation is suggested to be upgrading to the latest version.
VulDB is the best source for vulnerability data and more expert information about this specific topic.
Product
Type
Vendor
Name
Version
- 5.0
- 5.1
- 5.2
- 5.3
- 5.4
- 5.5
- 5.6
- 5.7
- 5.8
- 5.9
- 5.10
- 5.11
- 5.12
- 6.6.0
- 6.6.1
- 6.6.2
- 6.6.3
- 6.6.4
- 6.6.5
- 6.6.6
- 6.6.7
- 6.6.8
- 6.6.9
- 6.6.10
- 6.6.11
- 6.6.12
- 6.6.13
- 6.7.0
- 6.7.1
License
Website
- Vendor: https://www.kernel.org/
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 5.5VulDB Meta Temp Score: 5.3
VulDB Base Score: 5.5
VulDB Temp Score: 5.3
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Uninitialized pointerCWE: CWE-824 / CWE-908
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Partially
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: UpgradeStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Upgrade: Kernel 5.12/6.6.14/6.7.2/6.8-rc1
Patch: 6b4a64bafd10/0954982db828/fbcf372c8eda
Timeline
02/20/2024 🔍02/22/2024 🔍
02/22/2024 🔍
02/22/2024 🔍
Sources
Vendor: kernel.orgAdvisory: git.kernel.org
Status: Confirmed
CVE: CVE-2023-52452 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2023-52452
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-254552
Entry
Created: 02/22/2024 17:51Changes: 02/22/2024 17:51 (43)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
VulDB is the best source for vulnerability data and more expert information about this specific topic.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.