Homepage

Out-of-Bounds The advisory has been revoked - it doesn't affect any version of package bpftool  (opens in a new tab)

Threat Intelligence

EPSS
0.23% (14th 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-RHEL9-BPFTOOL-7933490
  • published12 Sept 2024
  • disclosed11 Sept 2024
Report a new vulnerability Found a mistake?

Introduced: 11 Sep 2024

CVE-2024-45022  (opens in a new tab)
CWE-119  (opens in a new tab)

Amendment

The Red Hat security team deemed this advisory irrelevant for RHEL:9.

NVD Description

Note: Versions mentioned in the description apply only to the upstream bpftool package and not the bpftool package as distributed by RHEL.

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

mm/vmalloc: fix page mapping if vm_area_alloc_pages() with high order fallback to order 0

The __vmap_pages_range_noflush() assumes its argument pages** contains pages with the same page shift. However, since commit e9c3cda4d86e ("mm, vmalloc: fix high order __GFP_NOFAIL allocations"), if gfp_flags includes __GFP_NOFAIL with high order in vm_area_alloc_pages() and page allocation failed for high order, the pages** may contain two different page shifts (high order and order-0). This could lead __vmap_pages_range_noflush() to perform incorrect mappings, potentially resulting in memory corruption.

Users might encounter this as follows (vmap_allow_huge = true, 2M is for PMD_SIZE):

kvmalloc(2M, __GFP_NOFAIL|GFP_X) __vmalloc_node_range_noprof(vm_flags=VM_ALLOW_HUGE_VMAP) vm_area_alloc_pages(order=9) ---> order-9 allocation failed and fallback to order-0 vmap_pages_range() vmap_pages_range_noflush() __vmap_pages_range_noflush(page_shift = 21) ----> wrong mapping happens

We can remove the fallback code because if a high-order allocation fails, __vmalloc_node_range_noprof() will retry with order-0. Therefore, it is unnecessary to fallback to order-0 here. Therefore, fix this by removing the fallback code.