CVE-2024-35877 Affecting python-perf package, versions *
Threat Intelligence
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 ID SNYK-CENTOS7-PYTHONPERF-6962353
- published 21 May 2024
- disclosed 19 May 2024
Introduced: 19 May 2024
CVE-2024-35877 Open this link in a new tabHow to fix?
There is no fixed version for Centos:7
python-perf
.
NVD Description
Note: Versions mentioned in the description apply only to the upstream python-perf
package and not the python-perf
package as distributed by Centos
.
See How to fix?
for Centos:7
relevant fixed versions and status.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
x86/mm/pat: fix VM_PAT handling in COW mappings
PAT handling won't do the right thing in COW mappings: the first PTE (or, in fact, all PTEs) can be replaced during write faults to point at anon folios. Reliably recovering the correct PFN and cachemode using follow_phys() from PTEs will not work in COW mappings.
Using follow_phys(), we might just get the address+protection of the anon folio (which is very wrong), or fail on swap/nonswap entries, failing follow_phys() and triggering a WARN_ON_ONCE() in untrack_pfn() and track_pfn_copy(), not properly calling free_pfn_range().
In free_pfn_range(), we either wouldn't call memtype_free() or would call it with the wrong range, possibly leaking memory.
To fix that, let's update follow_phys() to refuse returning anon folios, and fallback to using the stored PFN inside vma->vm_pgoff for COW mappings if we run into that.
We will now properly handle untrack_pfn() with COW mappings, where we don't need the cachemode. We'll have to fail fork()->track_pfn_copy() if the first page was replaced by an anon folio, though: we'd have to store the cachemode in the VMA to make this work, likely growing the VMA size.
For now, lets keep it simple and let track_pfn_copy() just fail in that case: it would have failed in the past with swap/nonswap entries already, and it would have done the wrong thing with anon folios.
Simple reproducer to trigger the WARN_ON_ONCE() in untrack_pfn():
<--- C reproducer ---> #include <stdio.h> #include <sys/mman.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <liburing.h>
int main(void) { struct io_uring_params p = {}; int ring_fd; size_t size; char *map;
ring_fd = io_uring_setup(1, &p);
if (ring_fd < 0) {
perror("io_uring_setup");
return 1;
}
size = p.sq_off.array + p.sq_entries * sizeof(unsigned);
/* Map the submission queue ring MAP_PRIVATE */
map = mmap(0, size, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_PRIVATE,
ring_fd, IORING_OFF_SQ_RING);
if (map == MAP_FAILED) {
perror(&#34;mmap&#34;);
return 1;
}
/* We have at least one page. Let&#39;s COW it. */
*map = 0;
pause();
return 0;
} <--- C reproducer --->
On a system with 16 GiB RAM and swap configured:
./iouring &
memhog 16G
killall iouring
[ 301.552930] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 301.553285] WARNING: CPU: 7 PID: 1402 at arch/x86/mm/pat/memtype.c:1060 untrack_pfn+0xf4/0x100 [ 301.553989] Modules linked in: binfmt_misc nft_fib_inet nft_fib_ipv4 nft_fib_ipv6 nft_fib nft_reject_g [ 301.558232] CPU: 7 PID: 1402 Comm: iouring Not tainted 6.7.5-100.fc38.x86_64 #1 [ 301.558772] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS rel-1.16.3-0-ga6ed6b701f0a-prebu4 [ 301.559569] RIP: 0010:untrack_pfn+0xf4/0x100 [ 301.559893] Code: 75 c4 eb cf 48 8b 43 10 8b a8 e8 00 00 00 3b 6b 28 74 b8 48 8b 7b 30 e8 ea 1a f7 000 [ 301.561189] RSP: 0018:ffffba2c0377fab8 EFLAGS: 00010282 [ 301.561590] RAX: 00000000ffffffea RBX: ffff9208c8ce9cc0 RCX: 000000010455e047 [ 301.562105] RDX: 07fffffff0eb1e0a RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: ffff9208c391d200 [ 301.562628] RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: ffffba2c0377fab8 R09: 0000000000000000 [ 301.563145] R10: ffff9208d2292d50 R11: 0000000000000002 R12: 00007fea890e0000 [ 301.563669] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: ffffba2c0377fc08 R15: 0000000000000000 [ 301.564186] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff920c2fbc0000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 301.564773] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 301.565197] CR2: 00007fea88ee8a20 CR3: 00000001033a8000 CR4: 0000000000750ef0 [ 301.565725] PKRU: 55555554 [ 301.565944] Call Trace: [ 301.566148] <TASK> [ 301.566325] ? untrack_pfn+0xf4/0x100 [ 301.566618] ? __warn+0x81/0x130 [ 301.566876] ? untrack_pfn+0xf4/0x100 [ 3 ---truncated---
References
- https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2024-35877
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/04c35ab3bdae7fefbd7c7a7355f29fa03a035221
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/09e6bb53217bf388a0d2fd7fb21e74ab9dffc173
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1341e4b32e1fb1b0acd002ccd56f07bd32f2abc6
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/51b7841f3fe84606ec0bd8da859d22e05e5419ec
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/7cfee26d1950250b14c5cb0a37b142f3fcc6396a
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/97e93367e82752e475a33839a80b33bdbef1209f
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c2b2430b48f3c9eaccd2c3d2ad75bb540d4952f4
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f18681daaec9665a15c5e7e0f591aad5d0ac622b
- https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2024/06/msg00017.html
- https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2024/06/msg00020.html