CVE-2022-49093

Public on

Last Modified: UTC

Moderate Moderate Impact What does this mean?
7 CVSS v3 Base Score

Description

The MITRE CVE dictionary describes this issue as

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: skbuff: fix coalescing for page_pool fragment recycling Fix a use-after-free when using page_pool with page fragments. We encountered this problem during normal RX in the hns3 driver: (1) Initially we have three descriptors in the RX queue. The first one allocates PAGE1 through page_pool, and the other two allocate one half of PAGE2 each. Page references look like this: RX_BD1 _______ PAGE1 RX_BD2 _______ PAGE2 RX_BD3 _________/ (2) Handle RX on the first descriptor. Allocate SKB1, eventually added to the receive queue by tcp_queue_rcv(). (3) Handle RX on the second descriptor. Allocate SKB2 and pass it to netif_receive_skb(): netif_receive_skb(SKB2) ip_rcv(SKB2) SKB3 = skb_clone(SKB2) SKB2 and SKB3 share a reference to PAGE2 through skb_shinfo()->dataref. The other ref to PAGE2 is still held by RX_BD3: SKB2 ---+- PAGE2 SKB3 __/ / RX_BD3 _________/ (3b) Now while handling TCP, coalesce SKB3 with SKB1: tcp_v4_rcv(SKB3) tcp_try_coalesce(to=SKB1, from=SKB3) // succeeds kfree_skb_partial(SKB3) skb_release_data(SKB3) // drops one dataref SKB1 _____ PAGE1 \____ SKB2 _____ PAGE2 / RX_BD3 _________/ In skb_try_coalesce(), __skb_frag_ref() takes a page reference to PAGE2, where it should instead have increased the page_pool frag reference, pp_frag_count. Without coalescing, when releasing both SKB2 and SKB3, a single reference to PAGE2 would be dropped. Now when releasing SKB1 and SKB2, two references to PAGE2 will be dropped, resulting in underflow. (3c) Drop SKB2: af_packet_rcv(SKB2) consume_skb(SKB2) skb_release_data(SKB2) // drops second dataref page_pool_return_skb_page(PAGE2) // drops one pp_frag_count SKB1 _____ PAGE1 \____ PAGE2 / RX_BD3 _________/ (4) Userspace calls recvmsg() Copies SKB1 and releases it. Since SKB3 was coalesced with SKB1, we release the SKB3 page as well: tcp_eat_recv_skb(SKB1) skb_release_data(SKB1) page_pool_return_skb_page(PAGE1) page_pool_return_skb_page(PAGE2) // drops second pp_frag_count (5) PAGE2 is freed, but the third RX descriptor was still using it! In our case this causes IOMMU faults, but it would silently corrupt memory if the IOMMU was disabled. Change the logic that checks whether pp_recycle SKBs can be coalesced. We still reject differing pp_recycle between 'from' and 'to' SKBs, but in order to avoid the situation described above, we also reject coalescing when both 'from' and 'to' are pp_recycled and 'from' is cloned. The new logic allows coalescing a cloned pp_recycle SKB into a page refcounted one, because in this case the release (4) will drop the right reference, the one taken by skb_try_coalesce().

Statement

The bug in memory management of networking that can lead to IOMMU faults or to use after free. The attack complexity is high, because few complex conditions should happen together (that hard to trigger). For the Red Hat Enterprise Linux (all versions) bug not actual, because already fixed.

Mitigation

Mitigation for this issue is either not available or the currently available options do not meet the Red Hat Product Security criteria comprising ease of use and deployment, applicability to widespread installation base or stability.

Additional Information

External References

Content from www.cve.org is not included.https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49093

Content from nvd.nist.gov is not included.https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-49093

Content from lore.kernel.org is not included.https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/2025022659-CVE-2022-49093-0ccf@gregkh/T

Affected Packages and Issued Red Hat Security Errata

Products / Services Components State Errata
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 kernel Not affected
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 kernel Out of support scope
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 kernel Not affected
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 kernel-rt Not affected
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 kernel Not affected
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 kernel-rt Not affected
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 kernel Fixed RHSA-2022:8267
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 kernel-rt Not affected
Unless explicitly stated as not affected, all previous versions of packages in any minor update stream of a product listed here should be assumed vulnerable, although may not have been subject to full analysis.

Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details

Important note

CVSS scores for open source components depend on vendor-specific factors (e.g. version or build chain). Therefore, Red Hat's score and impact rating can be different from NVD and other vendors. Red Hat remains the authoritative CVE Naming Authorities (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications ).

CVSS v3 Score Breakdown Red Hat NVD
CVSS v3 Base Score 7
Attack Vector Local
Attack Complexity High
Privileges Required Low
User Interaction None
Scope Unchanged
Confidentiality Impact High
Integrity Impact High
Availability Impact High

CVSS v3 Vector

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

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is Red Hat's CVSS v3 score or Impact different from other vendors?

 For open source software shipped by multiple vendors, the CVSS base scores may vary for each vendor's version depending on the version they ship, how they ship it, the platform, and even how the software is compiled. This makes scoring of vulnerabilities difficult for third-party vulnerability databases such as NVD that only provide a single CVSS base score for each vulnerability. Red Hat scores reflect how a vulnerability affects our products specifically.

For more information, see https://access.redhat.com/solutions/762393.

My product is listed as "Under investigation" or "Affected", when will Red Hat release a fix for this vulnerability?
  • "Under investigation" doesn't necessarily mean that the product is affected by this vulnerability. It only means that our Analysis Team is still working on determining whether the product is affected and how it is affected.
  • "Affected" means that our Analysis Team has determined that this product is affected by this vulnerability and might release a fix to address this in the near future.

What can I do if my product is listed as "Will not fix"?

 A "will not fix" status means that a fix for an affected product version is not planned or not possible due to complexity, which may create additional risk.

Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
  • Upgrade to a supported product version that includes a fix for this vulnerability (recommended).
  • Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
  • Open a This content is not included.support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.

What can I do if my product is listed as "Fix deferred"?

 A deferred status means that a fix for an affected product version is not guaranteed due to higher-priority development work.

Available options depend mostly on the Impact of the vulnerability and the current Life Cycle phase of your product. Overall, you have the following options:
  • Apply a mitigation (if one exists).
  • Open a This content is not included.support case to request a prioritization of releasing a fix for this vulnerability.
  • Red Hat Engineering focuses on addressing high-priority issues based on their complexity or limited lifecycle support. Therefore, lower-priority issues will not receive immediate fixes.

What is a mitigation?

 A mitigation is an action that can be taken to reduce the impact of a security vulnerability, without deploying any fixes.

I have a Red Hat product but it is not in the above list, is it affected?

 The listed products were found to include one or more of the components that this vulnerability affects. These products underwent a thorough evaluation to determine their affectedness by this vulnerability. Note that layered products (such as container-based offerings) that consume affected components from any of the products listed in this table may be affected and are not represented.

Why is my security scanner reporting my product as vulnerable to this vulnerability even though my product version is fixed or not affected?

 In order to maintain code stability and compatibility, Red Hat usually does not rebase packages to entirely new versions. Instead, we backport fixes and new features to an older version of the package we distribute. This can result in some security scanners that only consider the package version to report the package as vulnerable. To avoid this, we suggest that you use an approved vulnerability scanner from our This content is not included.Red Hat Vulnerability Scanner Certification program.

My product is listed as "Out of Support Scope". What does this mean?

 When a product is listed as "Out of Support Scope", it means a vulnerability with the impact level assigned to this CVE is no longer covered by its current support lifecycle phase. The product has been identified to contain the impacted component, but analysis to determine whether it is affected or not by this vulnerability was not performed. The product should be assumed to be affected. Customers are advised to apply any mitigation options documented on this page, consider removing or disabling the impacted component, or upgrade to a supported version of the product that has an update available.