ghsa-wwfp-4jrf-hfh5
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-05-14 03:56
Modified
2022-05-14 03:56
Severity ?
Details
fs/namespace.c in the Linux kernel before 4.9 does not restrict how many mounts may exist in a mount namespace, which allows local users to cause a denial of service (memory consumption and deadlock) via MS_BIND mount system calls, as demonstrated by a loop that triggers exponential growth in the number of mounts.
{ "affected": [], "aliases": [ "CVE-2016-6213" ], "database_specific": { "cwe_ids": [ "CWE-400" ], "github_reviewed": false, "github_reviewed_at": null, "nvd_published_at": "2016-12-28T07:59:00Z", "severity": "MODERATE" }, "details": "fs/namespace.c in the Linux kernel before 4.9 does not restrict how many mounts may exist in a mount namespace, which allows local users to cause a denial of service (memory consumption and deadlock) via MS_BIND mount system calls, as demonstrated by a loop that triggers exponential growth in the number of mounts.", "id": "GHSA-wwfp-4jrf-hfh5", "modified": "2022-05-14T03:56:18Z", "published": "2022-05-14T03:56:18Z", "references": [ { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-6213" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/d29216842a85c7970c536108e093963f02714498" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:1842" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:2077" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1356471" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d29216842a85c7970c536108e093963f02714498" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2016/07/13/8" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/91754" } ], "schema_version": "1.4.0", "severity": [ { "score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H", "type": "CVSS_V3" } ] }
Loading...
Loading...
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.