CVE-2023-53764
What it is
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: wifi: ath12k: Handle lock during peer_id find ath12k_peer_find_by_id() requires that the caller hold the ab->base_lock. Currently the WBM error path does not hold the lock and calling that function, leads to the following lockdep_assert()in QCN9274: [105162.160893] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [105162.160916] WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 0 at drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath12k/peer.c:71 ath12k_peer_find_by_id+0x52/0x60 [ath12k] [105162.160933] Modules linked in: ath12k(O) qrtr_mhi qrtr mac80211 cfg80211 mhi qmi_helpers libarc4 nvme nvme_core [last unloaded: ath12k(O)] [105162.160967] CPU: 3 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/3 Tainted: G W O 6.1.0-rc2+ #3 [105162.160972] Hardware name: Intel(R) Client Systems NUC8i7HVK/NUC8i7HVB, BIOS HNKBLi70.86A.0056.2019.0506.1527 05/06/2019 [105162.160977] RIP: 0010:ath12k_peer_find_by_id+0x52/0x60 [ath12k] [105162.160990] Code: 07 eb 0f 39 68 24 74 0a 48 8b 00 48 39 f8 75 f3 31 c0 5b 5d c3 48 8d bf b0 f2 00 00 be ff ff ff ff e8 22 20 c4 e2 85 c0 75 bf <0f> 0b eb bb 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 41 54 4c 8d a7 98 f2 00 [105162.160996] RSP: 0018:ffffa223001acc60 EFLAGS: 00010246 [105162.161003] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9f0573940000 RCX: 0000000000000000 [105162.161008] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: ffffffffa3951c8e RDI: ffffffffa39a96d7 [105162.161013] RBP: 000000000000000a R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 [105162.161017] R10: ffffa223001acb40 R11: ffffffffa3d57c60 R12: ffff9f057394f2e0 [105162.161022] R13: ffff9f0573940000 R14: ffff9f04ecd659c0 R15: ffff9f04d5a9b040 [105162.161026] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff9f0575600000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [105162.161031] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [105162.161036] CR2: 00001d5c8277a008 CR3: 00000001e6224006 CR4: 00000000003706e0 [105162.161041] Call Trace: [105162.161046] <IRQ> [105162.161051] ath12k_dp_rx_process_wbm_err+0x6da/0xaf0 [ath12k] [105162.161072] ? ath12k_dp_rx_process_err+0x80e/0x15a0 [ath12k] [105162.161084] ? __lock_acquire+0x4ca/0x1a60 [105162.161104] ath12k_dp_service_srng+0x263/0x310 [ath12k] [105162.161120] ath12k_pci_ext_grp_napi_poll+0x1c/0x70 [ath12k] [105162.161133] __napi_poll+0x22/0x260 [105162.161141] net_rx_action+0x2f8/0x380 [105162.161153] __do_softirq+0xd0/0x4c9 [105162.161162] irq_exit_rcu+0x88/0xe0 [105162.161169] common_interrupt+0xa5/0xc0 [105162.161174] </IRQ> [105162.161179] <TASK> [105162.161184] asm_common_interrupt+0x22/0x40 Handle spin lock/unlock in WBM error path to hold the necessary lock expected by ath12k_peer_find_by_id(). Tested-on: QCN9274 hw2.0 PCI WLAN.WBE.1.0-03171-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1
At a glance
- Exploitability
- Can be exploited from the same network segment without logging in. High risk of data exposure, data tampering, service disruption.
- 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
- ReservedThe CVE id was reserved by its CNA
- 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: 8.8 HIGH (CVSS).
- Fix: none linked yet, which raises it.
Details
- Published
- Last modified
- Exploit probability
- 0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days
- Record status
- Deferred
Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 8.8
- Attack vector
- Adjacent network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges needed
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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-2023-53764.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2023-53764. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.
