What is the CVSS score of CVE-2024-40998?

CVE-2024-40998 has a CVSS 3.1 base score of 5.5 (Medium). CVSS vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H. EPSS exploitation probability: 0.3%.

Is there a patch available for CVE-2024-40998?

Yes, a patch is available for CVE-2024-40998. Update the affected software to the latest version immediately.

Linux Kernel CVE-2024-40998

MEDIUM

Use of Uninitialized Resource (CWE-908)

2024-07-12 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

Information Disclosure Linux Linux Kernel

5.5

CVSS 3.1 · NVD

Severity by source

NVD PRIMARY

5.5 MEDIUM

AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Primary rating from NVD · only source for this CVE.

CVSS VectorNVD

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Attack Vector

Local

Attack Complexity

Low

Privileges Required

Low

User Interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

None

Integrity

None

Availability

High

Lifecycle Timeline

CVE Published

Jul 12, 2024 - 13:15 nvd

MEDIUM 5.5

DescriptionNVD

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

ext4: fix uninitialized ratelimit_state->lock access in __ext4_fill_super()

In the following concurrency we will access the uninitialized rs->lock:

ext4_fill_super ext4_register_sysfs // sysfs registered msg_ratelimit_interval_ms // Other processes modify rs->interval to // non-zero via msg_ratelimit_interval_ms ext4_orphan_cleanup ext4_msg(sb, KERN_INFO, "Errors on filesystem, " __ext4_msg ___ratelimit(&(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_msg_ratelimit_state) if (!rs->interval) // do nothing if interval is 0 return 1; raw_spin_trylock_irqsave(&rs->lock, flags) raw_spin_trylock(lock) _raw_spin_trylock __raw_spin_trylock spin_acquire(&lock->dep_map, 0, 1, _RET_IP_) lock_acquire __lock_acquire register_lock_class assign_lock_key dump_stack(); ratelimit_state_init(&sbi->s_msg_ratelimit_state, 5 * HZ, 10); raw_spin_lock_init(&rs->lock); // init rs->lock here

and get the following dump_stack:

=========== INFO: trying to register non-static key. The code is fine but needs lockdep annotation, or maybe you didn't initialize this object before use? turning off the locking correctness validator. CPU: 12 PID: 753 Comm: mount Tainted: G E 6.7.0-rc6-next-20231222 #504 [...] Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl+0xc5/0x170 dump_stack+0x18/0x30 register_lock_class+0x740/0x7c0 __lock_acquire+0x69/0x13a0 lock_acquire+0x120/0x450 _raw_spin_trylock+0x98/0xd0 ___ratelimit+0xf6/0x220 __ext4_msg+0x7f/0x160 [ext4] ext4_orphan_cleanup+0x665/0x740 [ext4] __ext4_fill_super+0x21ea/0x2b10 [ext4] ext4_fill_super+0x14d/0x360 [ext4] [...] ===========

Normally interval is 0 until s_msg_ratelimit_state is initialized, so ___ratelimit() does nothing. But registering sysfs precedes initializing rs->lock, so it is possible to change rs->interval to a non-zero value via the msg_ratelimit_interval_ms interface of sysfs while rs->lock is uninitialized, and then a call to ext4_msg triggers the problem by accessing an uninitialized rs->lock. Therefore register sysfs after all initializations are complete to avoid such problems.

AnalysisAI

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: fix uninitialized ratelimit_state->lock access in __ext4_fill_super() In the following concurrency we will access the. Rated medium severity (CVSS 5.5), this vulnerability is low attack complexity. This Use of Uninitialized Resource vulnerability could allow attackers to access uninitialized memory causing crashes or information disclosure.

Technical ContextAI

This vulnerability is classified as Use of Uninitialized Resource (CWE-908), which allows attackers to access uninitialized memory causing crashes or information disclosure. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: fix uninitialized ratelimit_state->lock access in __ext4_fill_super() In the following concurrency we will access the uninitialized rs->lock: ext4_fill_super ext4_register_sysfs // sysfs registered msg_ratelimit_interval_ms // Other processes modify rs->interval to // non-zero via msg_ratelimit_interval_ms ext4_orphan_cleanup ext4_msg(sb, KERN_INFO, "Errors on filesystem, " __ext4_msg ___ratelimit(&(EXT4_SB(sb)->s_msg_ratelimit_state) if (!rs->interval) // do nothing if interval is 0 return 1; raw_spin_trylock_irqsave(&rs->lock, flags) raw_spin_trylock(lock) _raw_spin_trylock __raw_spin_trylock spin_acquire(&lock->dep_map, 0, 1, _RET_IP_) lock_acquire __lock_acquire register_lock_class assign_lock_key dump_stack(); ratelimit_state_init(&sbi->s_msg_ratelimit_state, 5 * HZ, 10); raw_spin_lock_init(&rs->lock); // init rs->lock here and get the following dump_stack: =========== INFO: trying to register non-static key. The code is fine but needs lockdep annotation, or maybe you didn't initialize this object before use? turning off the locking correctness validator. CPU: 12 PID: 753 Comm: mount Tainted: G E 6.7.0-rc6-next-20231222 #504 [...] Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl+0xc5/0x170 dump_stack+0x18/0x30 register_lock_class+0x740/0x7c0 __lock_acquire+0x69/0x13a0 lock_acquire+0x120/0x450 _raw_spin_trylock+0x98/0xd0 ___ratelimit+0xf6/0x220 __ext4_msg+0x7f/0x160 [ext4] ext4_orphan_cleanup+0x665/0x740 [ext4] __ext4_fill_super+0x21ea/0x2b10 [ext4] ext4_fill_super+0x14d/0x360 [ext4] [...] =========== Normally interval is 0 until s_msg_ratelimit_state is initialized, so ___ratelimit() does nothing. But registering sysfs precedes initializing rs->lock, so it is possible to change rs->interval to a non-zero value via the msg_ratelimit_interval_ms interface of sysfs while rs->lock is uninitialized, and then a call to ext4_msg triggers the problem by accessing an uninitialized rs->lock. Therefore register sysfs after all initializations are complete to avoid such problems. Affected products include: Linux Linux Kernel.

RemediationAI

A vendor patch is available. Apply the latest security update as soon as possible. Initialize all variables, use compiler warnings for uninitialized access, use memory-safe languages.