CVE ID : CVE-2024-53125
Published : Dec. 4, 2024, 2:15 p.m. | 17 minutes ago
Description : In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: sync_linked_regs() must preserve subreg_def Range propagation must not affect subreg_def marks, otherwise the following example is rewritten by verifier incorrectly when BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32 flag is set: 0: call bpf_ktime_get_ns call bpf_ktime_get_ns 1: r0 &= 0x7fffffff after verifier r0 &= 0x7fffffff 2: w1 = w0 rewrites w1 = w0 3: if w0 < 10 goto +0 --------------> r11 = 0x2f5674a6 (r) 4: r1 >>= 32 r11 >= 32 r0 = r1 exit (or zero extension of w1 at (2) is missing for architectures that require zero extension for upper register half). The following happens w/o this patch: - r0 is marked as not a subreg at (0); - w1 is marked as subreg at (2); - w1 subreg_def is overridden at (3) by copy_register_state(); - w1 is read at (5) but mark_insn_zext() does not mark (2) for zero extension, because w1 subreg_def is not set; - because of BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32 flag verifier inserts random value for hi32 bits of (2) (marked (r)); - this random value is read at (5).
Severity: 0.0 | NA
Visit the link for more details, such as CVSS details, affected products, timeline, and more...
Full story here:
Published : Dec. 4, 2024, 2:15 p.m. | 17 minutes ago
Description : In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: sync_linked_regs() must preserve subreg_def Range propagation must not affect subreg_def marks, otherwise the following example is rewritten by verifier incorrectly when BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32 flag is set: 0: call bpf_ktime_get_ns call bpf_ktime_get_ns 1: r0 &= 0x7fffffff after verifier r0 &= 0x7fffffff 2: w1 = w0 rewrites w1 = w0 3: if w0 < 10 goto +0 --------------> r11 = 0x2f5674a6 (r) 4: r1 >>= 32 r11 >= 32 r0 = r1 exit (or zero extension of w1 at (2) is missing for architectures that require zero extension for upper register half). The following happens w/o this patch: - r0 is marked as not a subreg at (0); - w1 is marked as subreg at (2); - w1 subreg_def is overridden at (3) by copy_register_state(); - w1 is read at (5) but mark_insn_zext() does not mark (2) for zero extension, because w1 subreg_def is not set; - because of BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32 flag verifier inserts random value for hi32 bits of (2) (marked (r)); - this random value is read at (5).
Severity: 0.0 | NA
Visit the link for more details, such as CVSS details, affected products, timeline, and more...
Full story here: