Memory Leak Affecting kernel-debug-devel 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-RHEL8-KERNELDEBUGDEVEL-8282590
- published 23 Oct 2024
- disclosed 21 Oct 2024
Introduced: 21 Oct 2024
CVE-2022-48975 Open this link in a new tabHow to fix?
There is no fixed version for RHEL:8
kernel-debug-devel
.
NVD Description
Note: Versions mentioned in the description apply only to the upstream kernel-debug-devel
package and not the kernel-debug-devel
package as distributed by RHEL
.
See How to fix?
for RHEL:8
relevant fixed versions and status.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
gpiolib: fix memory leak in gpiochip_setup_dev()
Here is a backtrace report about memory leak detected in gpiochip_setup_dev():
unreferenced object 0xffff88810b406400 (size 512): comm "python3", pid 1682, jiffies 4295346908 (age 24.090s) backtrace: kmalloc_trace device_add device_private_init at drivers/base/core.c:3361 (inlined by) device_add at drivers/base/core.c:3411 cdev_device_add gpiolib_cdev_register gpiochip_setup_dev gpiochip_add_data_with_key
gcdev_register() & gcdev_unregister() would call device_add() & device_del() (no matter CONFIG_GPIO_CDEV is enabled or not) to register/unregister device.
However, if device_add() succeeds, some resource (like struct device_private allocated by device_private_init()) is not released by device_del().
Therefore, after device_add() succeeds by gcdev_register(), it needs to call put_device() to release resource in the error handle path.
Here we move forward the register of release function, and let it release every piece of resource by put_device() instead of kfree().
While at it, fix another subtle issue, i.e. when gc->ngpio is equal to 0, we still call kcalloc() and, in case of further error, kfree() on the ZERO_PTR pointer, which is not NULL. It's not a bug per se, but rather waste of the resources and potentially wrong expectation about contents of the gdev->descs variable.