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

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

mctp: route: hold key->lock in mctp_flow_prepare_output()

mctp_flow_prepare_output() checks key->dev and may call mctp_dev_set_key(), but it does not hold key->lock while doing so.

mctp_dev_set_key() and mctp_dev_release_key() are annotated with __must_hold(&key->lock), so key->dev access is intended to be serialized by key->lock. The mctp_sendmsg() transmit path reaches mctp_flow_prepare_output() via mctp_local_output() -> mctp_dst_output() without holding key->lock, so the check-and-set sequence is racy.

Example interleaving:

CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- mctp_flow_prepare_output(key, devA) if (!key->dev) // sees NULL mctp_flow_prepare_output( key, devB) if (!key->dev) // still NULL mctp_dev_set_key(devB, key) mctp_dev_hold(devB) key->dev = devB mctp_dev_set_key(devA, key) mctp_dev_hold(devA) key->dev = devA // overwrites devB

Now both devA and devB references were acquired, but only the final key->dev value is tracked for release. One reference can be lost, causing a resource leak as mctp_dev_release_key() would only decrease the reference on one dev.

Fix by taki…

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

mctp: route: hold key->lock in mctp_flow_prepare_output()

mctp_flow_prepare_output() checks key->dev and may call mctp_dev_set_key(), but it does not hold key->lock while doing so.

mctp_dev_set_key() and mctp_dev_release_key() are annotated with __must_hold(&key->lock), so key->dev access is intended to be serialized by key->lock. The mctp_sendmsg() transmit path reaches mctp_flow_prepare_output() via mctp_local_output() -> mctp_dst_output() without holding key->lock, so the check-and-set sequence is racy.

Example interleaving:

CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- mctp_flow_prepare_output(key, devA) if (!key->dev) // sees NULL mctp_flow_prepare_output( key, devB) if (!key->dev) // still NULL mctp_dev_set_key(devB, key) mctp_dev_hold(devB) key->dev = devB mctp_dev_set_key(devA, key) mctp_dev_hold(devA) key->dev = devA // overwrites devB

Now both devA and devB references were acquired, but only the final key->dev value is tracked for release. One reference can be lost, causing a resource leak as mctp_dev_release_key() would only decrease the reference on one dev.

Fix by taki…

Security update for the Linux Kernel

Security update for the Linux Kernel

Affected: Ubuntu:16.04:LTS: linux-hwe-edge, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.0, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure-edge, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gcp, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gcp-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gke-4.15, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gke-5.4 and 140 more

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mctp: route: hold key->lock in mctp_flow_prepare_output() mctp_flow_prepare_output() checks key->dev and may call mctp_dev_set_key(), but it does not hold key->lock while doing so. mctp_dev_set_key() and mctp_dev_release_key() are annotated with __must_hold(&key->lock), so key->dev access is intended to be serialized by key->lock. The mctp_sendmsg() transmit path reaches mctp_flow_prepare_output() via mctp_local_output() -> mctp_dst_output() without holding key->lock, so the check-and-set sequence is racy. Example interleaving: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- mctp_flow_prepare_output(key, devA) if (!key->dev) // sees NULL mctp_flow_prepare_output( key, devB) if (!key->dev) // still NULL mctp_dev_set_key(devB, key) mctp_dev_hold(devB) key->dev = devB mctp_dev_set_key(devA, key) mctp_dev_hold(devA) key->dev = devA // overwrites devB Now both devA and devB references were acquired, but only the final key->dev value is tracked for release. One reference can be lost, causing a resource leak as mctp_dev_release_key() would only decrease the reference on one dev. Fix by taking key-…

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