CVE-2023-53857
What it is
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: bpf_sk_storage: Fix invalid wait context lockdep report './test_progs -t test_local_storage' reported a splat: [ 27.137569] ============================= [ 27.138122] [ BUG: Invalid wait context ] [ 27.138650] 6.5.0-03980-gd11ae1b16b0a #247 Tainted: G O [ 27.139542] ----------------------------- [ 27.140106] test_progs/1729 is trying to lock: [ 27.140713] ffff8883ef047b88 (stock_lock){-.-.}-{3:3}, at: local_lock_acquire+0x9/0x130 [ 27.141834] other info that might help us debug this: [ 27.142437] context-{5:5} [ 27.142856] 2 locks held by test_progs/1729: [ 27.143352] #0: ffffffff84bcd9c0 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:3}, at: rcu_lock_acquire+0x4/0x40 [ 27.144492] #1: ffff888107deb2c0 (&storage->lock){..-.}-{2:2}, at: bpf_local_storage_update+0x39e/0x8e0 [ 27.145855] stack backtrace: [ 27.146274] CPU: 0 PID: 1729 Comm: test_progs Tainted: G O 6.5.0-03980-gd11ae1b16b0a #247 [ 27.147550] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a1990b-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 [ 27.149127] Call Trace: [ 27.149490] <TASK> [ 27.149867] dump_stack_lvl+0x130/0x1d0 [ 27.152609] dump_stack+0x14/0x20 [ 27.153131] __lock_acquire+0x1657/0x2220 [ 27.153677] lock_acquire+0x1b8/0x510 [ 27.157908] local_lock_acquire+0x29/0x130 [ 27.159048] obj_cgroup_charge+0xf4/0x3c0 [ 27.160794] slab_pre_alloc_hook+0x28e/0x2b0 [ 27.161931] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x51/0x210 [ 27.163557] __kmalloc+0xaa/0x210 [ 27.164593] bpf_map_kzalloc+0xbc/0x170 [ 27.165147] bpf_selem_alloc+0x130/0x510 [ 27.166295] bpf_local_storage_update+0x5aa/0x8e0 [ 27.167042] bpf_fd_sk_storage_update_elem+0xdb/0x1a0 [ 27.169199] bpf_map_update_value+0x415/0x4f0 [ 27.169871] map_update_elem+0x413/0x550 [ 27.170330] __sys_bpf+0x5e9/0x640 [ 27.174065] __x64_sys_bpf+0x80/0x90 [ 27.174568] do_syscall_64+0x48/0xa0 [ 27.175201] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6e/0xd8 [ 27.175932] RIP: 0033:0x7effb40e41ad [ 27.176357] Code: ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 90 f3 0f 1e fa 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d8 [ 27.179028] RSP: 002b:00007ffe64c21fc8 EFLAGS: 00000202 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000141 [ 27.180088] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ffe64c22768 RCX: 00007effb40e41ad [ 27.181082] RDX: 0000000000000020 RSI: 00007ffe64c22008 RDI: 0000000000000002 [ 27.182030] RBP: 00007ffe64c21ff0 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00007ffe64c22788 [ 27.183038] R10: 0000000000000064 R11: 0000000000000202 R12: 0000000000000000 [ 27.184006] R13: 00007ffe64c22788 R14: 00007effb42a1000 R15: 0000000000000000 [ 27.184958] </TASK> It complains about acquiring a local_lock while holding a raw_spin_lock. It means it should not allocate memory while holding a raw_spin_lock since it is not safe for RT. raw_spin_lock is needed because bpf_local_storage supports tracing context. In particular for task local storage, it is easy to get a "current" task PTR_TO_BTF_ID in tracing bpf prog. However, task (and cgroup) local storage has already been moved to bpf mem allocator which can be used after raw_spin_lock. The splat is for the sk storage. For sk (and inode) storage, it has not been moved to bpf mem allocator. Using raw_spin_lock or not, kzalloc(GFP_ATOMIC) could theoretically be unsafe in tracing context. However, the local storage helper requires a verifier accepted sk pointer (PTR_TO_BTF_ID), it is hypothetical if that (mean running a bpf prog in a kzalloc unsafe context and also able to hold a verifier accepted sk pointer) could happen. This patch avoids kzalloc after raw_spin_lock to silent the splat. There is an existing kzalloc before the raw_spin_lock. At that point, a kzalloc is very likely required because a lookup has just been done before. Thus, this patch always does the kzalloc before acq ---truncated---
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-2023-53857.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2023-53857. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.
