Strix
26.1K

CVE-2022-50093

HIGHCVSS 7.1/10EPSS 0.21%

Last modified

CVE-2022-50093 is a high-severity vulnerability rated 7.1/10 on the CVSS scale. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: iommu/vt-d: avoid invalid memory access via node_online(NUMA_NO_NODE) KASAN reports: [ 4.668325][ T0] BUG: KASAN: wild-memory-access in dmar_parse_one_rhsa (arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:214 arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:226 include/asm-generic/bitops/instrumented-non-atomic.h:142 include/linux/nodemask.h:415 drivers/iommu/intel/dmar.c:497) [ 4.676149][ T0] Read of size 8 at addr 1fffffff85115558 by task swapper/0/0 [ 4.683454][ T0] [ 4.685638][ T0] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.19.0-rc3-00004-g0e862838f290 #1 [ 4.694331][ T0] Hardware name: Supermicro SYS-5018D-FN4T/X10SDV-8C-TLN4F, BIOS 1.1 03/02/2016 [ 4.703196][ T0] Call Trace: [ 4.706334][ T0] <TASK> [ 4.709133][ T0] ? dmar_parse_one_rhsa (arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:214 arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:226 include/asm-generic/bitops/instrumented-non-atomic.h:142 include/linux/nodemask.h:415 drivers/iommu/intel/dmar.c:497) after converting the type of the first argument (@nr, bit number) of arch_test_bit() from `long` to `unsigned long`[0]. Under certain conditions (for example, when ACPI NUMA is disabled via command line), pxm_to_node() can return %NUMA_NO_NODE (-1). It is valid 'magic' number of NUMA node, but not valid bit number to use in bitops. node_online() eventually descends to test_bit() without checking for the input, assuming it's on caller side (which might be good for perf-critical tasks). There, -1 becomes %ULONG_MAX which leads to an insane array index when calculating bit position in memory. For now, add an explicit check for @node being not %NUMA_NO_NODE before calling test_bit(). EPSS estimates a 0.21% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: iommu/vt-d: avoid invalid memory access via node_online(NUMA_NO_NODE) KASAN reports: [ 4.668325][ T0] BUG: KASAN: wild-memory-access in dmar_parse_one_rhsa (arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:214 arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:226 include/asm-generic/bitops/instrumented-non-atomic.h:142 include/linux/nodemask.h:415 drivers/iommu/intel/dmar.c:497) [ 4.676149][ T0] Read of size 8 at addr 1fffffff85115558 by task swapper/0/0 [ 4.683454][ T0] [ 4.685638][ T0] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.19.0-rc3-00004-g0e862838f290 #1 [ 4.694331][ T0] Hardware name: Supermicro SYS-5018D-FN4T/X10SDV-8C-TLN4F, BIOS 1.1 03/02/2016 [ 4.703196][ T0] Call Trace: [ 4.706334][ T0] <TASK> [ 4.709133][ T0] ? dmar_parse_one_rhsa (arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:214 arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:226 include/asm-generic/bitops/instrumented-non-atomic.h:142 include/linux/nodemask.h:415 drivers/iommu/intel/dmar.c:497) after converting the type of the first argument (@nr, bit number) of arch_test_bit() from `long` to `unsigned long`[0]. Under certain conditions (for example, when ACPI NUMA is disabled via command line), pxm_to_node() can return %NUMA_NO_NODE (-1). It is valid 'magic' number of NUMA node, but not valid bit number to use in bitops. node_online() eventually descends to test_bit() without checking for the input, assuming it's on caller side (which might be good for perf-critical tasks). There, -1 becomes %ULONG_MAX which leads to an insane array index when calculating bit position in memory. For now, add an explicit check for @node being not %NUMA_NO_NODE before calling test_bit(). The actual logics didn't change here at all. [0] https://github.com/norov/linux/commit/0e862838f290147ea9c16db852d8d494b552d38d

Metrics

CVSS 3.1
7.1/10

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

EPSS Probability
0.21%

11.3th percentile

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days. Learn more

Weakness Enumeration

Affected Software

VendorProductVersions
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 2.6.33, < 5.4.211
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 5.5, < 5.10.137
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 5.11, < 5.15.61
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 5.16, < 5.18.18
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 5.19, < 5.19.2

References

Timeline

Published
Last Modified
Status
Analyzed

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2022-50093?
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: iommu/vt-d: avoid invalid memory access via node_online(NUMA_NO_NODE) KASAN reports: [ 4.668325][ T0] BUG: KASAN: wild-memory-access in dmar_parse_one_rhsa (arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:214 arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:226 include/asm-generic/bitops/instrumented-non-atomic.h:142 include/linux/nodemask.h:415 drivers/iommu/intel/dmar.c:497) [ 4.676149][ T0] Read of size 8 at addr 1fffffff85115558 by task swapper/0/0 [ 4.683454][ T0] [ 4.685638][ T0] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.19.0-rc3-00004-g0e862838f290 #1 [ 4.694331][ T0] Hardware name: Supermicro SYS-5018D-FN4T/X10SDV-8C-TLN4F, BIOS 1.1 03/02/2016 [ 4.703196][ T0] Call Trace: [ 4.706334][ T0] <TASK> [ 4.709133][ T0] ? dmar_parse_one_rhsa (arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:214 arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:226 include/asm-generic/bitops/instrumented-non-atomic.h:142 include/linux/nodemask.h:415 drivers/iommu/intel/dmar.c:497) after converting the type of the first argument (@nr, bit number) of arch_test_bit() from `long` to `unsigned long`[0]. Under certain conditions (for example, when ACPI NUMA is disabled via command line), pxm_to_node() can return %NUMA_NO_NODE (-1). It is valid 'magic' number of NUMA node, but not valid bit number to use in bitops. node_online() eventually descends to test_bit() without checking for the input, assuming it's on caller side (which might be good for perf-critical tasks). There, -1 becomes %ULONG_MAX which leads to an insane array index when calculating bit position in memory. For now, add an explicit check for @node being not %NUMA_NO_NODE before calling test_bit(). The actual logics didn't change here at all. [0] https://github.com/norov/linux/commit/0e862838f290147ea9c16db852d8d494b552d38d
How severe is CVE-2022-50093?
CVE-2022-50093 has a CVSS score of 7.1/10 (HIGH severity). The EPSS model estimates a 0.21% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.
How do I fix CVE-2022-50093?
Check the vendor references and advisories linked above for patched versions and mitigation guidance. You can also run a Strix scan to test if your systems are affected.

Are you affected by CVE-2022-50093?

Run a free Strix scan to check your systems for this vulnerability.

Scan your code now

Source: NVD / NIST