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

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

NFSD: Prevent lock owner use-after-free during client teardown

__destroy_client() releases a client's open owners, but a lock owner whose only reference is a blocked lock (nbl) stays on cl_ownerstr_hashtbl. client_has_state() does not count a bare owner, so DESTROY_CLIENTID can reach __destroy_client() with such owners present.

__destroy_client() then walks the table, calling remove_blocked_locks() on each owner without a reference. Freeing a blocked lock drops the owner reference held via flc_owner. The per-net laundromat reaps blocked locks from nn->blocked_locks_lru independently of client state. The two paths share blocked_locks_lock only for the list splice, not the owner's lifetime. The laundromat therefore frees the owner as __destroy_client() dereferences it, a NULL dereference in remove_blocked_locks().

nfsd4_release_lockowner() holds a reference across the same call; __destroy_client() does not. Hold cl_lock across the walk, taking a reference and unhashing each owner, then drop it before remove_blocked_locks() and nfs4_put_stateowner(), which take blocked_locks_lock and cl_lock.

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

NFSD: Prevent lock owner use-after-free during client teardown

__destroy_client() releases a client's open owners, but a lock owner whose only reference is a blocked lock (nbl) stays on cl_ownerstr_hashtbl. client_has_state() does not count a bare owner, so DESTROY_CLIENTID can reach __destroy_client() with such owners present.

__destroy_client() then walks the table, calling remove_blocked_locks() on each owner without a reference. Freeing a blocked lock drops the owner reference held via flc_owner. The per-net laundromat reaps blocked locks from nn->blocked_locks_lru independently of client state. The two paths share blocked_locks_lock only for the list splice, not the owner's lifetime. The laundromat therefore frees the owner as __destroy_client() dereferences it, a NULL dereference in remove_blocked_locks().

nfsd4_release_lockowner() holds a reference across the same call; __destroy_client() does not. Hold cl_lock across the walk, taking a reference and unhashing each owner, then drop it before remove_blocked_locks() and nfs4_put_stateowner(), which take blocked_locks_lock and cl_lock.

kernel-devel-7.2.7-1.1 on GA media

Affected: Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux-azure, 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, Ubuntu:16.04:LTS: linux-hwe-edge, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-oracle, Ubuntu:Pro:18.04:LTS: linux, Ubuntu:Pro:18.04:LTS: linux-aws, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.0 and 239 more

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: NFSD: Prevent lock owner use-after-free during client teardown __destroy_client() releases a client's open owners, but a lock owner whose only reference is a blocked lock (nbl) stays on cl_ownerstr_hashtbl. client_has_state() does not count a bare owner, so DESTROY_CLIENTID can reach __destroy_client() with such owners present. __destroy_client() then walks the table, calling remove_blocked_locks() on each owner without a reference. Freeing a blocked lock drops the owner reference held via flc_owner. The per-net laundromat reaps blocked locks from nn->blocked_locks_lru independently of client state. The two paths share blocked_locks_lock only for the list splice, not the owner's lifetime. The laundromat therefore frees the owner as __destroy_client() dereferences it, a NULL dereference in remove_blocked_locks(). nfsd4_release_lockowner() holds a reference across the same call; __destroy_client() does not. Hold cl_lock across the walk, taking a reference and unhashing each owner, then drop it before remove_blocked_locks() and nfs4_put_stateowner(), which take blocked_locks_lock and cl_lock.

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, Daten oder den Systemzustand zu manipulieren, Denial-of-Service-Zustände herbeizuführen oder andere, nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen.