CVE-2023-52982
What it is
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fscache: Use wait_on_bit() to wait for the freeing of relinquished volume The freeing of relinquished volume will wake up the pending volume acquisition by using wake_up_bit(), however it is mismatched with wait_var_event() used in fscache_wait_on_volume_collision() and it will never wake up the waiter in the wait-queue because these two functions operate on different wait-queues. According to the implementation in fscache_wait_on_volume_collision(), if the wake-up of pending acquisition is delayed longer than 20 seconds (e.g., due to the delay of on-demand fd closing), the first wait_var_event_timeout() will timeout and the following wait_var_event() will hang forever as shown below: FS-Cache: Potential volume collision new=00000024 old=00000022 ...... INFO: task mount:1148 blocked for more than 122 seconds. Not tainted 6.1.0-rc6+ #1 task:mount state:D stack:0 pid:1148 ppid:1 Call Trace: <TASK> __schedule+0x2f6/0xb80 schedule+0x67/0xe0 fscache_wait_on_volume_collision.cold+0x80/0x82 __fscache_acquire_volume+0x40d/0x4e0 erofs_fscache_register_volume+0x51/0xe0 [erofs] erofs_fscache_register_fs+0x19c/0x240 [erofs] erofs_fc_fill_super+0x746/0xaf0 [erofs] vfs_get_super+0x7d/0x100 get_tree_nodev+0x16/0x20 erofs_fc_get_tree+0x20/0x30 [erofs] vfs_get_tree+0x24/0xb0 path_mount+0x2fa/0xa90 do_mount+0x7c/0xa0 __x64_sys_mount+0x8b/0xe0 do_syscall_64+0x30/0x60 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0xb0 Considering that wake_up_bit() is more selective, so fix it by using wait_on_bit() instead of wait_var_event() to wait for the freeing of relinquished volume. In addition because waitqueue_active() is used in wake_up_bit() and clear_bit() doesn't imply any memory barrier, use clear_and_wake_up_bit() to add the missing memory barrier between cursor->flags and waitqueue_active().
At a glance
- Exploitability
- Can be exploited locally on the machine with a low-privilege account. High risk of service disruption.
- Exploit odds
- 0.2% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).
- Fix
- A patch, advisory or fixed version is referenced. Upgrade or apply it.
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: 5.5 MEDIUM (CVSS).
- Fix: a patch or advisory is linked.
Details
- Published
- Last modified
- Exploit probability
- 0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days
- Record status
- Analyzed
Affected
- Linux Kernel < 6.1.11
- Linux Kernel 6.2
Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 5.5
- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges needed
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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-2023-52982.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2023-52982. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.
Fix and advisories
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/3be069f42a7b79d3149194f21cdf24bf23864cac
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/8226e37d82f43657da34dd770e2b38f20242ada7