CVE-2024-26837

MEDIUMCVSS 4.7/10EPSS 0.17%

Last modified

CVE-2024-26837 is a medium-severity vulnerability rated 4.7/10 on the CVSS scale. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: bridge: switchdev: Skip MDB replays of deferred events on offload Before this change, generation of the list of MDB events to replay would race against the creation of new group memberships, either from the IGMP/MLD snooping logic or from user configuration. While new memberships are immediately visible to walkers of br->mdb_list, the notification of their existence to switchdev event subscribers is deferred until a later point in time. So if a replay list was generated during a time that overlapped with such a window, it would also contain a replay of the not-yet-delivered event. The driver would thus receive two copies of what the bridge internally considered to be one single event. EPSS estimates a 0.17% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: bridge: switchdev: Skip MDB replays of deferred events on offload Before this change, generation of the list of MDB events to replay would race against the creation of new group memberships, either from the IGMP/MLD snooping logic or from user configuration. While new memberships are immediately visible to walkers of br->mdb_list, the notification of their existence to switchdev event subscribers is deferred until a later point in time. So if a replay list was generated during a time that overlapped with such a window, it would also contain a replay of the not-yet-delivered event. The driver would thus receive two copies of what the bridge internally considered to be one single event. On destruction of the bridge, only a single membership deletion event was therefore sent. As a consequence of this, drivers which reference count memberships (at least DSA), would be left with orphan groups in their hardware database when the bridge was destroyed. This is only an issue when replaying additions. While deletion events may still be pending on the deferred queue, they will already have been removed from br->mdb_list, so no duplicates can be generated in that scenario. To a user this meant that old group memberships, from a bridge in which a port was previously attached, could be reanimated (in hardware) when the port joined a new bridge, without the new bridge's knowledge. For example, on an mv88e6xxx system, create a snooping bridge and immediately add a port to it: root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ ip link add dev br0 up type bridge mcast_snooping 1 && \ > ip link set dev x3 up master br0 And then destroy the bridge: root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ ip link del dev br0 root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ mvls atu ADDRESS FID STATE Q F 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a DEV:0 Marvell 88E6393X 33:33:00:00:00:6a 1 static - - 0 . . . . . . . . . . 33:33:ff:87:e4:3f 1 static - - 0 . . . . . . . . . . ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 1 static - - 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ The two IPv6 groups remain in the hardware database because the port (x3) is notified of the host's membership twice: once via the original event and once via a replay. Since only a single delete notification is sent, the count remains at 1 when the bridge is destroyed. Then add the same port (or another port belonging to the same hardware domain) to a new bridge, this time with snooping disabled: root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ ip link add dev br1 up type bridge mcast_snooping 0 && \ > ip link set dev x3 up master br1 All multicast, including the two IPv6 groups from br0, should now be flooded, according to the policy of br1. But instead the old memberships are still active in the hardware database, causing the switch to only forward traffic to those groups towards the CPU (port 0). Eliminate the race in two steps: 1. Grab the write-side lock of the MDB while generating the replay list. This prevents new memberships from showing up while we are generating the replay list. But it leaves the scenario in which a deferred event was already generated, but not delivered, before we grabbed the lock. Therefore: 2. Make sure that no deferred version of a replay event is already enqueued to the switchdev deferred queue, before adding it to the replay list, when replaying additions.

Metrics

CVSS 3.1
4.7/10

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

EPSS Probability
0.17%

6.2th percentile

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days. Learn more

Weakness Enumeration

Affected Software

VendorProductVersionsUpdate
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 5.13, < 6.1.80
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 6.2, < 6.6.19
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 6.7, < 6.7.7
LinuxLinux Kernel6.8Rc1

References

Timeline

Published
Last Modified
Status
Analyzed

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2024-26837?
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: bridge: switchdev: Skip MDB replays of deferred events on offload Before this change, generation of the list of MDB events to replay would race against the creation of new group memberships, either from the IGMP/MLD snooping logic or from user configuration. While new memberships are immediately visible to walkers of br->mdb_list, the notification of their existence to switchdev event subscribers is deferred until a later point in time. So if a replay list was generated during a time that overlapped with such a window, it would also contain a replay of the not-yet-delivered event. The driver would thus receive two copies of what the bridge internally considered to be one single event. On destruction of the bridge, only a single membership deletion event was therefore sent. As a consequence of this, drivers which reference count memberships (at least DSA), would be left with orphan groups in their hardware database when the bridge was destroyed. This is only an issue when replaying additions. While deletion events may still be pending on the deferred queue, they will already have been removed from br->mdb_list, so no duplicates can be generated in that scenario. To a user this meant that old group memberships, from a bridge in which a port was previously attached, could be reanimated (in hardware) when the port joined a new bridge, without the new bridge's knowledge. For example, on an mv88e6xxx system, create a snooping bridge and immediately add a port to it: root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ ip link add dev br0 up type bridge mcast_snooping 1 && \ > ip link set dev x3 up master br0 And then destroy the bridge: root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ ip link del dev br0 root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ mvls atu ADDRESS FID STATE Q F 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a DEV:0 Marvell 88E6393X 33:33:00:00:00:6a 1 static - - 0 . . . . . . . . . . 33:33:ff:87:e4:3f 1 static - - 0 . . . . . . . . . . ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 1 static - - 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ The two IPv6 groups remain in the hardware database because the port (x3) is notified of the host's membership twice: once via the original event and once via a replay. Since only a single delete notification is sent, the count remains at 1 when the bridge is destroyed. Then add the same port (or another port belonging to the same hardware domain) to a new bridge, this time with snooping disabled: root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ ip link add dev br1 up type bridge mcast_snooping 0 && \ > ip link set dev x3 up master br1 All multicast, including the two IPv6 groups from br0, should now be flooded, according to the policy of br1. But instead the old memberships are still active in the hardware database, causing the switch to only forward traffic to those groups towards the CPU (port 0). Eliminate the race in two steps: 1. Grab the write-side lock of the MDB while generating the replay list. This prevents new memberships from showing up while we are generating the replay list. But it leaves the scenario in which a deferred event was already generated, but not delivered, before we grabbed the lock. Therefore: 2. Make sure that no deferred version of a replay event is already enqueued to the switchdev deferred queue, before adding it to the replay list, when replaying additions.
How severe is CVE-2024-26837?
CVE-2024-26837 has a CVSS score of 4.7/10 (MEDIUM severity). The EPSS model estimates a 0.17% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.
How do I fix CVE-2024-26837?
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-2024-26837?

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

Scan your code now

Source: NVD / NIST