CVE-20XX-?
agent?

CVE-2022-49961

7.1 HIGH 0.3% exploit odds Fix listed Memory safety OS & kernel

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Do mark_chain_precision for ARG_CONST_ALLOC_SIZE_OR_ZERO Precision markers need to be propagated whenever we have an ARG_CONST_* style argument, as the verifier cannot consider imprecise scalars to be equivalent for the purposes of states_equal check when such arguments refine the return value (in this case, set mem_size for PTR_TO_MEM). The resultant mem_size for the R0 is derived from the constant value, and if the verifier incorrectly prunes states considering them equivalent where such arguments exist (by seeing that both registers have reg->precise as false in regsafe), we can end up with invalid programs passing the verifier which can do access beyond what should have been the correct mem_size in that explored state. To show a concrete example of the problem: 0000000000000000 <prog>: 0: r2 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 80) 1: r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 76) 2: r3 = r1 3: r3 += 4 4: if r3 > r2 goto +18 <LBB5_5> 5: w2 = 0 6: *(u32 *)(r1 + 0) = r2 7: r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 0) 8: r2 = 1 9: if w1 == 0 goto +1 <LBB5_3> 10: r2 = -1 0000000000000058 <LBB5_3>: 11: r1 = 0 ll 13: r3 = 0 14: call bpf_ringbuf_reserve 15: if r0 == 0 goto +7 <LBB5_5> 16: r1 = r0 17: r1 += 16777215 18: w2 = 0 19: *(u8 *)(r1 + 0) = r2 20: r1 = r0 21: r2 = 0 22: call bpf_ringbuf_submit 00000000000000b8 <LBB5_5>: 23: w0 = 0 24: exit For the first case, the single line execution's exploration will prune the search at insn 14 for the branch insn 9's second leg as it will be verified first using r2 = -1 (UINT_MAX), while as w1 at insn 9 will always be 0 so at runtime we don't get error for being greater than UINT_MAX/4 from bpf_ringbuf_reserve. The verifier during regsafe just sees reg->precise as false for both r2 registers in both states, hence considers them equal for purposes of states_equal. If we propagated precise markers using the backtracking support, we would use the precise marking to then ensure that old r2 (UINT_MAX) was within the new r2 (1) and this would never be true, so the verification would rightfully fail. The end result is that the out of bounds access at instruction 19 would be permitted without this fix. Note that reg->precise is always set to true when user does not have CAP_BPF (or when subprog count is greater than 1 (i.e. use of any static or global functions)), hence this is only a problem when precision marks need to be explicitly propagated (i.e. privileged users with CAP_BPF). A simplified test case has been included in the next patch to prevent future regressions.

At a glance

Exploitability
Can be exploited locally on the machine with a low-privilege account. High risk of data exposure, service disruption.
Exploit odds
0.3% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).
Fix
A patch, advisory or fixed version is referenced. Upgrade or apply it.

Timeline

  1. PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
  2. Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

Details

Published
Last modified
Exploit probability
0.3% · EPSS, next 30 days
Weakness
CWE-125 · Out-of-bounds read
Record status
Modified

Affected

Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 7.1

Attack vector
Local
Complexity
Low
Privileges needed
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
High
Raw vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H

Is it in your code?

Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.

Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2022-49961.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2022-49961. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.

· More options · Status badge

Meme: I wake up, CVE-2022-49961
Download Square Reddit

Fix and advisories

References

NVD record · CVE.org record