CVE-2023-52527

MEDIUMCVSS 5.5/10EPSS 0.23%

Last modified

CVE-2023-52527 is a medium-severity vulnerability rated 5.5/10 on the CVSS scale. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv4, ipv6: Fix handling of transhdrlen in __ip{,6}_append_data() Including the transhdrlen in length is a problem when the packet is partially filled (e.g. something like send(MSG_MORE) happened previously) when appending to an IPv4 or IPv6 packet as we don't want to repeat the transport header or account for it twice. EPSS estimates a 0.23% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv4, ipv6: Fix handling of transhdrlen in __ip{,6}_append_data() Including the transhdrlen in length is a problem when the packet is partially filled (e.g. something like send(MSG_MORE) happened previously) when appending to an IPv4 or IPv6 packet as we don't want to repeat the transport header or account for it twice. This can happen under some circumstances, such as splicing into an L2TP socket. The symptom observed is a warning in __ip6_append_data(): WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 5042 at net/ipv6/ip6_output.c:1800 __ip6_append_data.isra.0+0x1be8/0x47f0 net/ipv6/ip6_output.c:1800 that occurs when MSG_SPLICE_PAGES is used to append more data to an already partially occupied skbuff. The warning occurs when 'copy' is larger than the amount of data in the message iterator. This is because the requested length includes the transport header length when it shouldn't. This can be triggered by, for example: sfd = socket(AF_INET6, SOCK_DGRAM, IPPROTO_L2TP); bind(sfd, ...); // ::1 connect(sfd, ...); // ::1 port 7 send(sfd, buffer, 4100, MSG_MORE); sendfile(sfd, dfd, NULL, 1024); Fix this by only adding transhdrlen into the length if the write queue is empty in l2tp_ip6_sendmsg(), analogously to how UDP does things. l2tp_ip_sendmsg() looks like it won't suffer from this problem as it builds the UDP packet itself.

Metrics

CVSS 3.1
5.5/10

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

EPSS Probability
0.23%

13.2th percentile

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days. Learn more

Affected Software

VendorProductVersionsUpdate
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 3.5, < 4.14.327
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 4.15, < 4.19.296
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 4.20, < 5.4.258
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 5.5, < 5.10.198
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 5.11, < 5.15.135
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 5.16, < 6.1.57
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 6.2, < 6.5.7
LinuxLinux Kernel6.6Rc1

References

Timeline

Published
Last Modified
Status
Analyzed

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2023-52527?
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv4, ipv6: Fix handling of transhdrlen in __ip{,6}_append_data() Including the transhdrlen in length is a problem when the packet is partially filled (e.g. something like send(MSG_MORE) happened previously) when appending to an IPv4 or IPv6 packet as we don't want to repeat the transport header or account for it twice. This can happen under some circumstances, such as splicing into an L2TP socket. The symptom observed is a warning in __ip6_append_data(): WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 5042 at net/ipv6/ip6_output.c:1800 __ip6_append_data.isra.0+0x1be8/0x47f0 net/ipv6/ip6_output.c:1800 that occurs when MSG_SPLICE_PAGES is used to append more data to an already partially occupied skbuff. The warning occurs when 'copy' is larger than the amount of data in the message iterator. This is because the requested length includes the transport header length when it shouldn't. This can be triggered by, for example: sfd = socket(AF_INET6, SOCK_DGRAM, IPPROTO_L2TP); bind(sfd, ...); // ::1 connect(sfd, ...); // ::1 port 7 send(sfd, buffer, 4100, MSG_MORE); sendfile(sfd, dfd, NULL, 1024); Fix this by only adding transhdrlen into the length if the write queue is empty in l2tp_ip6_sendmsg(), analogously to how UDP does things. l2tp_ip_sendmsg() looks like it won't suffer from this problem as it builds the UDP packet itself.
How severe is CVE-2023-52527?
CVE-2023-52527 has a CVSS score of 5.5/10 (MEDIUM severity). The EPSS model estimates a 0.23% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.
How do I fix CVE-2023-52527?
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-2023-52527?

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

Scan your code now

Source: NVD / NIST