CVE-2023-52925

MEDIUMCVSS 5.5/10EPSS 0.19%

Last modified

CVE-2023-52925 is a medium-severity vulnerability rated 5.5/10 on the CVSS scale. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfilter: nf_tables: don't fail inserts if duplicate has expired nftables selftests fail: run-tests.sh testcases/sets/0044interval_overlap_0 Expected: 0-2 . 0-3, got: W: [FAILED] ./testcases/sets/0044interval_overlap_0: got 1 Insertion must ignore duplicate but expired entries. Moreover, there is a strange asymmetry in nft_pipapo_activate: It refetches the current element, whereas the other ->activate callbacks (bitmap, hash, rhash, rbtree) use elem->priv. Same for .remove: other set implementations take elem->priv, nft_pipapo_remove fetches elem->priv, then does a relookup, remove this. I suspect this was the reason for the change that prompted the removal of the expired check in pipapo_get() in the first place, but skipping exired elements there makes no sense to me, this helper is used for normal get requests, insertions (duplicate check) and deactivate callback. In first two cases expired elements must be skipped. For ->deactivate(), this gets called for DELSETELEM, so it seems to me that expired elements should be skipped as well, i.e. delete request should fail with -ENOENT error.. EPSS estimates a 0.19% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfilter: nf_tables: don't fail inserts if duplicate has expired nftables selftests fail: run-tests.sh testcases/sets/0044interval_overlap_0 Expected: 0-2 . 0-3, got: W: [FAILED] ./testcases/sets/0044interval_overlap_0: got 1 Insertion must ignore duplicate but expired entries. Moreover, there is a strange asymmetry in nft_pipapo_activate: It refetches the current element, whereas the other ->activate callbacks (bitmap, hash, rhash, rbtree) use elem->priv. Same for .remove: other set implementations take elem->priv, nft_pipapo_remove fetches elem->priv, then does a relookup, remove this. I suspect this was the reason for the change that prompted the removal of the expired check in pipapo_get() in the first place, but skipping exired elements there makes no sense to me, this helper is used for normal get requests, insertions (duplicate check) and deactivate callback. In first two cases expired elements must be skipped. For ->deactivate(), this gets called for DELSETELEM, so it seems to me that expired elements should be skipped as well, i.e. delete request should fail with -ENOENT error.

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
0.19%

9.4th percentile

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days. Learn more

Affected Software

VendorProductVersionsUpdate
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 4.19.316, < 4.20
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 5.4.262, < 5.5
LinuxLinux Kernel6.4.11
LinuxLinux Kernel6.5Rc6

References

Timeline

Published
Last Modified
Status
Analyzed

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2023-52925?
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfilter: nf_tables: don't fail inserts if duplicate has expired nftables selftests fail: run-tests.sh testcases/sets/0044interval_overlap_0 Expected: 0-2 . 0-3, got: W: [FAILED] ./testcases/sets/0044interval_overlap_0: got 1 Insertion must ignore duplicate but expired entries. Moreover, there is a strange asymmetry in nft_pipapo_activate: It refetches the current element, whereas the other ->activate callbacks (bitmap, hash, rhash, rbtree) use elem->priv. Same for .remove: other set implementations take elem->priv, nft_pipapo_remove fetches elem->priv, then does a relookup, remove this. I suspect this was the reason for the change that prompted the removal of the expired check in pipapo_get() in the first place, but skipping exired elements there makes no sense to me, this helper is used for normal get requests, insertions (duplicate check) and deactivate callback. In first two cases expired elements must be skipped. For ->deactivate(), this gets called for DELSETELEM, so it seems to me that expired elements should be skipped as well, i.e. delete request should fail with -ENOENT error.
How severe is CVE-2023-52925?
CVE-2023-52925 has a CVSS score of 5.5/10 (MEDIUM severity). The EPSS model estimates a 0.19% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.
How do I fix CVE-2023-52925?
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-2023-52925?

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

Scan your code now

Source: NVD / NIST