Vulnerabilities > CVE-2024-26741 - Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling vulnerability in Linux Kernel
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: dccp/tcp: Unhash sk from ehash for tb2 alloc failure after check_estalblished(). syzkaller reported a warning [0] in inet_csk_destroy_sock() with no repro. WARN_ON(inet_sk(sk)->inet_num && !inet_csk(sk)->icsk_bind_hash); However, the syzkaller's log hinted that connect() failed just before the warning due to FAULT_INJECTION. [1] When connect() is called for an unbound socket, we search for an available ephemeral port. If a bhash bucket exists for the port, we call __inet_check_established() or __inet6_check_established() to check if the bucket is reusable. If reusable, we add the socket into ehash and set inet_sk(sk)->inet_num. Later, we look up the corresponding bhash2 bucket and try to allocate it if it does not exist. Although it rarely occurs in real use, if the allocation fails, we must revert the changes by check_established(). Otherwise, an unconnected socket could illegally occupy an ehash entry. Note that we do not put tw back into ehash because sk might have already responded to a packet for tw and it would be better to free tw earlier under such memory presure. [0]: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 350830 at net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c:1193 inet_csk_destroy_sock (net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c:1193) Modules linked in: Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.16.0-0-gd239552ce722-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:inet_csk_destroy_sock (net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c:1193) Code: 41 5c 41 5d 41 5e e9 2d 4a 3d fd e8 28 4a 3d fd 48 89 ef e8 f0 cd 7d ff 5b 5d 41 5c 41 5d 41 5e e9 13 4a 3d fd e8 0e 4a 3d fd <0f> 0b e9 61 fe ff ff e8 02 4a 3d fd 4c 89 e7 be 03 00 00 00 e8 05 RSP: 0018:ffffc9000b21fd38 EFLAGS: 00010293 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000009e78 RCX: ffffffff840bae40 RDX: ffff88806e46c600 RSI: ffffffff840bb012 RDI: ffff88811755cca8 RBP: ffff88811755c880 R08: 0000000000000003 R09: 0000000000000000 R10: 0000000000009e78 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffff88811755c8e0 R13: ffff88811755c892 R14: ffff88811755c918 R15: 0000000000000000 FS: 00007f03e5243800(0000) GS:ffff88811ae00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000001b32f21000 CR3: 0000000112ffe001 CR4: 0000000000770ef0 PKRU: 55555554 Call Trace: <TASK> ? inet_csk_destroy_sock (net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c:1193) dccp_close (net/dccp/proto.c:1078) inet_release (net/ipv4/af_inet.c:434) __sock_release (net/socket.c:660) sock_close (net/socket.c:1423) __fput (fs/file_table.c:377) __fput_sync (fs/file_table.c:462) __x64_sys_close (fs/open.c:1557 fs/open.c:1539 fs/open.c:1539) do_syscall_64 (arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83) entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe (arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:129) RIP: 0033:0x7f03e53852bb Code: 03 00 00 00 0f 05 48 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 41 c3 48 83 ec 18 89 7c 24 0c e8 43 c9 f5 ff 8b 7c 24 0c 41 89 c0 b8 03 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 35 44 89 c7 89 44 24 0c e8 a1 c9 f5 ff 8b 44 RSP: 002b:00000000005dfba0 EFLAGS: 00000293 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000003 RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000004 RCX: 00007f03e53852bb RDX: 0000000000000002 RSI: 0000000000000002 RDI: 0000000000000003 RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 000000000000167c R10: 0000000008a79680 R11: 0000000000000293 R12: 00007f03e4e43000 R13: 00007f03e4e43170 R14: 00007f03e4e43178 R15: 00007f03e4e43170 </TASK> [1]: FAULT_INJECTION: forcing a failure. name failslab, interval 1, probability 0, space 0, times 0 CPU: 0 PID: 350833 Comm: syz-executor.1 Not tainted 6.7.0-12272-g2121c43f88f5 #9 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.16.0-0-gd239552ce722-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl (lib/dump_stack.c:107 (discriminator 1)) should_fail_ex (lib/fault-inject.c:52 lib/fault-inject.c:153) should_failslab (mm/slub.c:3748) kmem_cache_alloc (mm/slub.c:3763 mm/slub.c:3842 mm/slub.c:3867) inet_bind2_bucket_create ---truncated---
Vulnerable Configurations
Common Weakness Enumeration (CWE)
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)
- Locate and Exploit Test APIs An attacker exploits a sample, demonstration, or test API that is insecure by default and should not be resident on production systems. Some applications include APIs that are intended to allow an administrator to test and refine their domain. These APIs should usually be disabled once a system enters a production environment. Testing APIs may expose a great deal of diagnostic information intended to aid an administrator, but which can also be used by an attacker to further refine their attack. Moreover, testing APIs may not have adequate security controls or may not have undergone rigorous testing since they were not intended for use in production environments. As such, they may have many flaws and vulnerabilities that would allow an attacker to severely disrupt a target.
- Flooding An attacker consumes the resources of a target by rapidly engaging in a large number of interactions with the target. This type of attack generally exposes a weakness in rate limiting or flow control in management of interactions. Since each request consumes some of the target's resources, if a sufficiently large number of requests must be processed at the same time then the target's resources can be exhausted. The degree to which the attack is successful depends upon the volume of requests in relation to the amount of the resource the target has access to, and other mitigating circumstances such as the target's ability to shift load or acquired additional resources to deal with the depletion. The more protected the resource and the greater the quantity of it that must be consumed, the more resources the attacker may need to have at their disposal. A typical TCP/IP flooding attack is a Distributed Denial-of-Service attack where many machines simultaneously make a large number of requests to a target. Against a target with strong defenses and a large pool of resources, many tens of thousands of attacking machines may be required. When successful this attack prevents legitimate users from accessing the service and can cause the target to crash. This attack differs from resource depletion through leaks or allocations in that the latter attacks do not rely on the volume of requests made to the target but instead focus on manipulation of the target's operations. The key factor in a flooding attack is the number of requests the attacker can make in a given period of time. The greater this number, the more likely an attack is to succeed against a given target.
- Excessive Allocation An attacker causes the target to allocate excessive resources to servicing the attackers' request, thereby reducing the resources available for legitimate services and degrading or denying services. Usually, this attack focuses on memory allocation, but any finite resource on the target could be the attacked, including bandwidth, processing cycles, or other resources. This attack does not attempt to force this allocation through a large number of requests (that would be Resource Depletion through Flooding) but instead uses one or a small number of requests that are carefully formatted to force the target to allocate excessive resources to service this request(s). Often this attack takes advantage of a bug in the target to cause the target to allocate resources vastly beyond what would be needed for a normal request. For example, using an Integer Attack, the attacker could cause a variable that controls allocation for a request to hold an excessively large value. Excessive allocation of resources can render a service degraded or unavailable to legitimate users and can even lead to crashing of the target.
- XML Ping of the Death An attacker initiates a resource depletion attack where a large number of small XML messages are delivered at a sufficiently rapid rate to cause a denial of service or crash of the target. Transactions such as repetitive SOAP transactions can deplete resources faster than a simple flooding attack because of the additional resources used by the SOAP protocol and the resources necessary to process SOAP messages. The transactions used are immaterial as long as they cause resource utilization on the target. In other words, this is a normal flooding attack augmented by using messages that will require extra processing on the target.
- XML Entity Expansion An attacker submits an XML document to a target application where the XML document uses nested entity expansion to produce an excessively large output XML. XML allows the definition of macro-like structures that can be used to simplify the creation of complex structures. However, this capability can be abused to create excessive demands on a processor's CPU and memory. A small number of nested expansions can result in an exponential growth in demands on memory.
References
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/334a8348b2df26526f3298848ad6864285592caf
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/334a8348b2df26526f3298848ad6864285592caf
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/66b60b0c8c4a163b022a9f0ad6769b0fd3dc662f
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/66b60b0c8c4a163b022a9f0ad6769b0fd3dc662f
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/729bc77af438a6e67914c97f6f3d3af8f72c0131
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/729bc77af438a6e67914c97f6f3d3af8f72c0131
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f8c4a6b850882bc47aaa864b720c7a2ee3102f39
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f8c4a6b850882bc47aaa864b720c7a2ee3102f39