ghsa-4fj7-85cf-9m8p
Vulnerability from github
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
parisc: Fix random data corruption from exception handler
The current exception handler implementation, which assists when accessing user space memory, may exhibit random data corruption if the compiler decides to use a different register than the specified register %r29 (defined in ASM_EXCEPTIONTABLE_REG) for the error code. If the compiler choose another register, the fault handler will nevertheless store -EFAULT into %r29 and thus trash whatever this register is used for. Looking at the assembly I found that this happens sometimes in emulate_ldd().
To solve the issue, the easiest solution would be if it somehow is possible to tell the fault handler which register is used to hold the error code. Using %0 or %1 in the inline assembly is not posssible as it will show up as e.g. %r29 (with the "%r" prefix), which the GNU assembler can not convert to an integer.
This patch takes another, better and more flexible approach: We extend the __ex_table (which is out of the execution path) by one 32-word. In this word we tell the compiler to insert the assembler instruction "or %r0,%r0,%reg", where %reg references the register which the compiler choosed for the error return code. In case of an access failure, the fault handler finds the __ex_table entry and can examine the opcode. The used register is encoded in the lowest 5 bits, and the fault handler can then store -EFAULT into this register.
Since we extend the __ex_table to 3 words we can't use the BUILDTIME_TABLE_SORT config option any longer.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-26706"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-04-03T15:15:53Z",
"severity": null
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nparisc: Fix random data corruption from exception handler\n\nThe current exception handler implementation, which assists when accessing\nuser space memory, may exhibit random data corruption if the compiler decides\nto use a different register than the specified register %r29 (defined in\nASM_EXCEPTIONTABLE_REG) for the error code. If the compiler choose another\nregister, the fault handler will nevertheless store -EFAULT into %r29 and thus\ntrash whatever this register is used for.\nLooking at the assembly I found that this happens sometimes in emulate_ldd().\n\nTo solve the issue, the easiest solution would be if it somehow is\npossible to tell the fault handler which register is used to hold the error\ncode. Using %0 or %1 in the inline assembly is not posssible as it will show\nup as e.g. %r29 (with the \"%r\" prefix), which the GNU assembler can not\nconvert to an integer.\n\nThis patch takes another, better and more flexible approach:\nWe extend the __ex_table (which is out of the execution path) by one 32-word.\nIn this word we tell the compiler to insert the assembler instruction\n\"or %r0,%r0,%reg\", where %reg references the register which the compiler\nchoosed for the error return code.\nIn case of an access failure, the fault handler finds the __ex_table entry and\ncan examine the opcode. The used register is encoded in the lowest 5 bits, and\nthe fault handler can then store -EFAULT into this register.\n\nSince we extend the __ex_table to 3 words we can\u0027t use the BUILDTIME_TABLE_SORT\nconfig option any longer.",
"id": "GHSA-4fj7-85cf-9m8p",
"modified": "2024-04-03T15:30:43Z",
"published": "2024-04-03T15:30:43Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-26706"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/23027309b099ffc4efca5477009a11dccbdae592"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/8b1d72395635af45410b66cc4c4ab37a12c4a831"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ce31d79aa1f13a2345791f84935281a2c194e003"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/fa69a8063f8b27f3c7434a0d4f464a76a62f24d2"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.