Affected: Alpaquita:23: linux-lts, Alpaquita:25: linux-lts, Alpaquita:stream: linux-lts

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

atm: fore200e: fix use-after-free in tasklets during device removal

When the PCA-200E or SBA-200E adapter is being detached, the fore200e is deallocated. However, the tx_tasklet or rx_tasklet may still be running or pending, leading to use-after-free bug when the already freed fore200e is accessed again in fore200e_tx_tasklet() or fore200e_rx_tasklet().

One of the race conditions can occur as follows:

CPU 0 (cleanup) | CPU 1 (tasklet) fore200e_pca_remove_one() | fore200e_interrupt() fore200e_shutdown() | tasklet_schedule() kfree(fore200e) | fore200e_tx_tasklet() | fore200e-> // UAF

Fix this by ensuring tx_tasklet or rx_tasklet is properly canceled before the fore200e is released. Add tasklet_kill() in fore200e_shutdown() to synchronize with any pending or running tasklets. Moreover, since fore200e_reset() could prevent further interrupts or data transfers, the tasklet_kill() should be placed after fore200e_reset() to prevent the tasklet from being rescheduled in fore200e_interrupt(). Finally, it only needs to do tasklet_kill() when the fore200e state is greater than or equal to FORE200E_STATE_IRQ, since tasklets are uninitialized in earlier states. In a word, the tasklet_kill() should be placed in the FORE200E_STATE_IRQ branch within the switch...case structure.

This bug was identified through static analysis.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

atm: fore200e: fix use-after-free in tasklets during device removal

When the PCA-200E or SBA-200E adapter is being detached, the fore200e is deallocated. However, the tx_tasklet or rx_tasklet may still be running or pending, leading to use-after-free bug when the already freed fore200e is accessed again in fore200e_tx_tasklet() or fore200e_rx_tasklet().

One of the race conditions can occur as follows:

CPU 0 (cleanup) | CPU 1 (tasklet) fore200e_pca_remove_one() | fore200e_interrupt() fore200e_shutdown() | tasklet_schedule() kfree(fore200e) | fore200e_tx_tasklet() | fore200e-> // UAF

Fix this by ensuring tx_tasklet or rx_tasklet is properly canceled before the fore200e is released. Add tasklet_kill() in fore200e_shutdown() to synchronize with any pending or running tasklets. Moreover, since fore200e_reset() could prevent further interrupts or data transfers, the tasklet_kill() should be placed after fore200e_reset() to prevent the tasklet from being rescheduled in fore200e_interrupt(). Finally, it only needs to do tasklet_kill() when the fore200e state is greater than or equal to FORE200E_STATE_IRQ, since tasklets are uninitialized in earlier states. In a word, the tasklet_kill() should be placed in the FORE200E_STATE_IRQ branch within the switch...case structure.

This bug was identified through static analysis.

Security update for the Linux Kernel

Security update for the Linux Kernel

Affected: Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux, Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux-aws, Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux-azure, Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux-lts-xenial, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-aws, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-aws-hwe, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-azure, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-gcp, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-hwe and 232 more

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: atm: fore200e: fix use-after-free in tasklets during device removal When the PCA-200E or SBA-200E adapter is being detached, the fore200e is deallocated. However, the tx_tasklet or rx_tasklet may still be running or pending, leading to use-after-free bug when the already freed fore200e is accessed again in fore200e_tx_tasklet() or fore200e_rx_tasklet(). One of the race conditions can occur as follows: CPU 0 (cleanup) | CPU 1 (tasklet) fore200e_pca_remove_one() | fore200e_interrupt() fore200e_shutdown() | tasklet_schedule() kfree(fore200e) | fore200e_tx_tasklet() | fore200e-> // UAF Fix this by ensuring tx_tasklet or rx_tasklet is properly canceled before the fore200e is released. Add tasklet_kill() in fore200e_shutdown() to synchronize with any pending or running tasklets. Moreover, since fore200e_reset() could prevent further interrupts or data transfers, the tasklet_kill() should be placed after fore200e_reset() to prevent the tasklet from being rescheduled in fore200e_interrupt(). Finally, it only needs to do tasklet_kill() when the fore200e state is greater than or equal to FORE200E_STATE_IRQ, since tasklets are uninitialized in earlier states. In a word, the tasklet_kill() should be placed in the FORE200E_STATE_IRQ branch within the switch...case structure. This bug was identified through static analysis.

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um nicht spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen, möglicherweise Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, Daten zu manipulieren oder offenzulegen oder einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand zu verursachen.