CVE-2022-50778
What it is
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fortify: Fix __compiletime_strlen() under UBSAN_BOUNDS_LOCAL With CONFIG_FORTIFY=y and CONFIG_UBSAN_LOCAL_BOUNDS=y enabled, we observe a runtime panic while running Android's Compatibility Test Suite's (CTS) android.hardware.input.cts.tests. This is stemming from a strlen() call in hidinput_allocate(). __compiletime_strlen() is implemented in terms of __builtin_object_size(), then does an array access to check for NUL-termination. A quirk of __builtin_object_size() is that for strings whose values are runtime dependent, __builtin_object_size(str, 1 or 0) returns the maximum size of possible values when those sizes are determinable at compile time. Example: static const char *v = "FOO BAR"; static const char *y = "FOO BA"; unsigned long x (int z) { // Returns 8, which is: // max(__builtin_object_size(v, 1), __builtin_object_size(y, 1)) return __builtin_object_size(z ? v : y, 1); } So when FORTIFY_SOURCE is enabled, the current implementation of __compiletime_strlen() will try to access beyond the end of y at runtime using the size of v. Mixed with UBSAN_LOCAL_BOUNDS we get a fault. hidinput_allocate() has a local C string whose value is control flow dependent on a switch statement, so __builtin_object_size(str, 1) evaluates to the maximum string length, making all other cases fault on the last character check. hidinput_allocate() could be cleaned up to avoid runtime calls to strlen() since the local variable can only have literal values, so there's no benefit to trying to fortify the strlen call site there. Perform a __builtin_constant_p() check against index 0 earlier in the macro to filter out the control-flow-dependant case. Add a KUnit test for checking the expected behavioral characteristics of FORTIFY_SOURCE internals.
At a glance
- Exploit odds
- 0.2% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).
- Fix
- No patch or advisory is linked yet. Look at mitigations or restrict exposure.
Timeline
- PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
- Last updatedMost recent change to the record
Why it ranks here
- Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
- Exploit odds: 0.2% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
- Severity: not scored yet.
- Fix: none linked yet, which raises it.
Details
- Published
- Last modified
- Exploit probability
- 0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days
- Record status
- Deferred
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-2022-50778.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2022-50778. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.
