Lucene search

K
debiancveDebian Security Bug TrackerDEBIANCVE:CVE-2024-38610
HistoryJun 19, 2024 - 2:15 p.m.

CVE-2024-38610

2024-06-1914:15:20
Debian Security Bug Tracker
security-tracker.debian.org
2
cve-2024-38610
drivers
acrn
pte checks
ram map
unix

7.1 High

AI Score

Confidence

High

0.0004 Low

EPSS

Percentile

10.4%

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drivers/virt/acrn: fix PFNMAP PTE checks in acrn_vm_ram_map() Patch series “mm: follow_pte() improvements and acrn follow_pte() fixes”. Patch #1 fixes a bunch of issues I spotted in the acrn driver. It compiles, that’s all I know. I’ll appreciate some review and testing from acrn folks. Patch #2+#3 improve follow_pte(), passing a VMA instead of the MM, adding more sanity checks, and improving the documentation. Gave it a quick test on x86-64 using VM_PAT that ends up using follow_pte(). This patch (of 3): We currently miss handling various cases, resulting in a dangerous follow_pte() (previously follow_pfn()) usage. (1) We’re not checking PTE write permissions. Maybe we should simply always require pte_write() like we do for pin_user_pages_fast(FOLL_WRITE)? Hard to tell, so let’s check for ACRN_MEM_ACCESS_WRITE for now. (2) We’re not rejecting refcounted pages. As we are not using MMU notifiers, messing with refcounted pages is dangerous and can result in use-after-free. Let’s make sure to reject them. (3) We are only looking at the first PTE of a bigger range. We only lookup a single PTE, but memmap->len may span a larger area. Let’s loop over all involved PTEs and make sure the PFN range is actually contiguous. Reject everything else: it couldn’t have worked either way, and rather made use access PFNs we shouldn’t be accessing.

7.1 High

AI Score

Confidence

High

0.0004 Low

EPSS

Percentile

10.4%

Related for DEBIANCVE:CVE-2024-38610