GHSA-2CVC-2CMJ-7863

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-10-21 12:30 – Updated: 2024-10-24 15:31
VLAI
Details

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

f2fs: check discard support for conventional zones

As the helper function f2fs_bdev_support_discard() shows, f2fs checks if the target block devices support discard by calling bdev_max_discard_sectors() and bdev_is_zoned(). This check works well for most cases, but it does not work for conventional zones on zoned block devices. F2fs assumes that zoned block devices support discard, and calls __submit_discard_cmd(). When __submit_discard_cmd() is called for sequential write required zones, it works fine since __submit_discard_cmd() issues zone reset commands instead of discard commands. However, when __submit_discard_cmd() is called for conventional zones, __blkdev_issue_discard() is called even when the devices do not support discard.

The inappropriate __blkdev_issue_discard() call was not a problem before the commit 30f1e7241422 ("block: move discard checks into the ioctl handler") because __blkdev_issue_discard() checked if the target devices support discard or not. If not, it returned EOPNOTSUPP. After the commit, __blkdev_issue_discard() no longer checks it. It always returns zero and sets NULL to the given bio pointer. This NULL pointer triggers f2fs_bug_on() in __submit_discard_cmd(). The BUG is recreated with the commands below at the umount step, where /dev/nullb0 is a zoned null_blk with 5GB total size, 128MB zone size and 10 conventional zones.

$ mkfs.f2fs -f -m /dev/nullb0 $ mount /dev/nullb0 /mnt $ for ((i=0;i<5;i++)); do dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/test bs=65536 count=1600 conv=fsync; done $ umount /mnt

To fix the BUG, avoid the inappropriate __blkdev_issue_discard() call. When discard is requested for conventional zones, check if the device supports discard or not. If not, return EOPNOTSUPP.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-47680"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-476"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-10-21T12:15:05Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nf2fs: check discard support for conventional zones\n\nAs the helper function f2fs_bdev_support_discard() shows, f2fs checks if\nthe target block devices support discard by calling\nbdev_max_discard_sectors() and bdev_is_zoned(). This check works well\nfor most cases, but it does not work for conventional zones on zoned\nblock devices. F2fs assumes that zoned block devices support discard,\nand calls __submit_discard_cmd(). When __submit_discard_cmd() is called\nfor sequential write required zones, it works fine since\n__submit_discard_cmd() issues zone reset commands instead of discard\ncommands. However, when __submit_discard_cmd() is called for\nconventional zones, __blkdev_issue_discard() is called even when the\ndevices do not support discard.\n\nThe inappropriate __blkdev_issue_discard() call was not a problem before\nthe commit 30f1e7241422 (\"block: move discard checks into the ioctl\nhandler\") because __blkdev_issue_discard() checked if the target devices\nsupport discard or not. If not, it returned EOPNOTSUPP. After the\ncommit, __blkdev_issue_discard() no longer checks it. It always returns\nzero and sets NULL to the given bio pointer. This NULL pointer triggers\nf2fs_bug_on() in __submit_discard_cmd(). The BUG is recreated with the\ncommands below at the umount step, where /dev/nullb0 is a zoned null_blk\nwith 5GB total size, 128MB zone size and 10 conventional zones.\n\n$ mkfs.f2fs -f -m /dev/nullb0\n$ mount /dev/nullb0 /mnt\n$ for ((i=0;i\u003c5;i++)); do dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/test bs=65536 count=1600 conv=fsync; done\n$ umount /mnt\n\nTo fix the BUG, avoid the inappropriate __blkdev_issue_discard() call.\nWhen discard is requested for conventional zones, check if the device\nsupports discard or not. If not, return EOPNOTSUPP.",
  "id": "GHSA-2cvc-2cmj-7863",
  "modified": "2024-10-24T15:31:07Z",
  "published": "2024-10-21T12:30:54Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-47680"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/43aec4d01bd2ce961817a777b3846f8318f398e4"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/7bd7ce68ddad5a28565e42ef21cacaff113773a9"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d2352b57897f6a3349666fc318dcbec99092c6a5"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…

Related by attack behaviour

Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.


Loading…