CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2011-0999

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption

Published: Feb 23, 2011 | Modified: Apr 11, 2025
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
4.9 MEDIUM
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C
RedHat/V2
4.9 MODERATE
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu
MEDIUM

mm/huge_memory.c in the Linux kernel before 2.6.38-rc5 does not prevent creation of a transparent huge page (THP) during the existence of a temporary stack for an exec system call, which allows local users to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted application.

Weakness

The product does not properly control the allocation and maintenance of a limited resource.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Linux_kernel Linux * 2.6.38 (excluding)
Linux_kernel Linux 2.6.38 (including) 2.6.38 (including)
Linux_kernel Linux 2.6.38-rc1 (including) 2.6.38-rc1 (including)
Linux_kernel Linux 2.6.38-rc2 (including) 2.6.38-rc2 (including)
Linux_kernel Linux 2.6.38-rc3 (including) 2.6.38-rc3 (including)
Linux_kernel Linux 2.6.38-rc4 (including) 2.6.38-rc4 (including)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 RedHat kernel-0:2.6.32-131.0.15.el6 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.0 EUS - Server Only RedHat kernel-0:2.6.32-71.31.1.el6 *
Linux Ubuntu karmic *
Linux Ubuntu natty *
Linux Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-ec2 Ubuntu karmic *
Linux-ec2 Ubuntu maverick *
Linux-ec2 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-fsl-imx51 Ubuntu karmic *
Linux-fsl-imx51 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-backport-maverick Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-backport-natty Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-mvl-dove Ubuntu karmic *
Linux-mvl-dove Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-source-2.6.15 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-ti-omap4 Ubuntu natty *
Linux-ti-omap4 Ubuntu upstream *

Potential Mitigations

  • Mitigation of resource exhaustion attacks requires that the target system either:

  • The first of these solutions is an issue in itself though, since it may allow attackers to prevent the use of the system by a particular valid user. If the attacker impersonates the valid user, they may be able to prevent the user from accessing the server in question.

  • The second solution is simply difficult to effectively institute – and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply makes the attack require more resources on the part of the attacker.

References