CVE-2024-46693
Last modified
CVE-2024-46693 is a medium-severity vulnerability rated 4.7/10 on the CVSS scale. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: soc: qcom: pmic_glink: Fix race during initialization As pointed out by Stephen Boyd it is possible that during initialization of the pmic_glink child drivers, the protection-domain notifiers fires, and the associated work is scheduled, before the client registration returns and as a result the local "client" pointer has been initialized. The outcome of this is a NULL pointer dereference as the "client" pointer is blindly dereferenced. Timeline provided by Stephen: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- ucsi->client = NULL; devm_pmic_glink_register_client() client->pdr_notify(client->priv, pg->client_state) pmic_glink_ucsi_pdr_notify() schedule_work(&ucsi->register_work) <schedule away> pmic_glink_ucsi_register() ucsi_register() pmic_glink_ucsi_read_version() pmic_glink_ucsi_read() pmic_glink_ucsi_read() pmic_glink_send(ucsi->client) <client is NULL BAD> ucsi->client = client // Too late! This code is identical across the altmode, battery manager and usci child drivers. Resolve this by splitting the allocation of the "client" object and the registration thereof into two operations. This only happens if the protection domain registry is populated at the time of registration, which by the introduction of commit '1ebcde047c54 ("soc: qcom: add pd-mapper implementation")' became much more likely.. EPSS estimates a 0.21% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.
Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: soc: qcom: pmic_glink: Fix race during initialization As pointed out by Stephen Boyd it is possible that during initialization of the pmic_glink child drivers, the protection-domain notifiers fires, and the associated work is scheduled, before the client registration returns and as a result the local "client" pointer has been initialized. The outcome of this is a NULL pointer dereference as the "client" pointer is blindly dereferenced. Timeline provided by Stephen: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- ucsi->client = NULL; devm_pmic_glink_register_client() client->pdr_notify(client->priv, pg->client_state) pmic_glink_ucsi_pdr_notify() schedule_work(&ucsi->register_work) <schedule away> pmic_glink_ucsi_register() ucsi_register() pmic_glink_ucsi_read_version() pmic_glink_ucsi_read() pmic_glink_ucsi_read() pmic_glink_send(ucsi->client) <client is NULL BAD> ucsi->client = client // Too late! This code is identical across the altmode, battery manager and usci child drivers. Resolve this by splitting the allocation of the "client" object and the registration thereof into two operations. This only happens if the protection domain registry is populated at the time of registration, which by the introduction of commit '1ebcde047c54 ("soc: qcom: add pd-mapper implementation")' became much more likely.
Metrics
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Weakness Enumeration
Affected Software
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Update |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.3, < 6.6.49 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.7, < 6.10.8 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | 6.11 | Rc1 |
References
Timeline
- Published
- Last Modified
- Status
- Analyzed
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2024-46693?
How severe is CVE-2024-46693?
How do I fix CVE-2024-46693?
Are you affected by CVE-2024-46693?
Run a free Strix scan to check your systems for this vulnerability.
Scan your code nowSource: NVD / NIST
