Homepage

CVE-2024-26935 Affecting kernel-rt-modules-extra package, versions <0:5.14.0-427.42.1.el9_4

Severity

 Recommended
medium

Based on AlmaLinux security rating.

Threat Intelligence

EPSS
0.04% (15th percentile)

Do your applications use this vulnerable package?

In a few clicks we can analyze your entire application and see what components are vulnerable in your application, and suggest you quick fixes.

Test your applications
  • Snyk IDSNYK-ALMALINUX9-KERNELRTMODULESEXTRA-8335319
  • published4 Nov 2024
  • disclosed30 Oct 2024
Report a new vulnerability Found a mistake?

Introduced: 30 Oct 2024

CVE-2024-26935  (opens in a new tab)

How to fix?

Upgrade AlmaLinux:9 kernel-rt-modules-extra to version 0:5.14.0-427.42.1.el9_4 or higher.
This issue was patched in ALSA-2024:8617.

NVD Description

Note: Versions mentioned in the description apply only to the upstream kernel-rt-modules-extra package and not the kernel-rt-modules-extra package as distributed by AlmaLinux. See How to fix? for AlmaLinux:9 relevant fixed versions and status.

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

scsi: core: Fix unremoved procfs host directory regression

Commit fc663711b944 ("scsi: core: Remove the /proc/scsi/${proc_name} directory earlier") fixed a bug related to modules loading/unloading, by adding a call to scsi_proc_hostdir_rm() on scsi_remove_host(). But that led to a potential duplicate call to the hostdir_rm() routine, since it's also called from scsi_host_dev_release(). That triggered a regression report, which was then fixed by commit be03df3d4bfe ("scsi: core: Fix a procfs host directory removal regression"). The fix just dropped the hostdir_rm() call from dev_release().

But it happens that this proc directory is created on scsi_host_alloc(), and that function "pairs" with scsi_host_dev_release(), while scsi_remove_host() pairs with scsi_add_host(). In other words, it seems the reason for removing the proc directory on dev_release() was meant to cover cases in which a SCSI host structure was allocated, but the call to scsi_add_host() didn't happen. And that pattern happens to exist in some error paths, for example.

Syzkaller causes that by using USB raw gadget device, error'ing on usb-storage driver, at usb_stor_probe2(). By checking that path, we can see that the BadDevice label leads to a scsi_host_put() after a SCSI host allocation, but there's no call to scsi_add_host() in such path. That leads to messages like this in dmesg (and a leak of the SCSI host proc structure):

usb-storage 4-1:87.51: USB Mass Storage device detected proc_dir_entry 'scsi/usb-storage' already registered WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 3519 at fs/proc/generic.c:377 proc_register+0x347/0x4e0 fs/proc/generic.c:376

The proper fix seems to still call scsi_proc_hostdir_rm() on dev_release(), but guard that with the state check for SHOST_CREATED; there is even a comment in scsi_host_dev_release() detailing that: such conditional is meant for cases where the SCSI host was allocated but there was no calls to {add,remove}_host(), like the usb-storage case.

This is what we propose here and with that, the error path of usb-storage does not trigger the warning anymore.

References

CVSS Scores

version 3.1