CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2014-4699

Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')

Published: Jul 09, 2014 | Modified: Feb 16, 2024
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
6.9 MEDIUM
AV:L/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
RedHat/V2
6.9 IMPORTANT
AV:L/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
RedHat/V3
Ubuntu
HIGH

The Linux kernel before 3.15.4 on Intel processors does not properly restrict use of a non-canonical value for the saved RIP address in the case of a system call that does not use IRET, which allows local users to leverage a race condition and gain privileges, or cause a denial of service (double fault), via a crafted application that makes ptrace and fork system calls.

Weakness

The product contains a code sequence that can run concurrently with other code, and the code sequence requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence that is operating concurrently.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Linux_kernel Linux 2.6.17 (including) 3.2.61 (excluding)
Linux_kernel Linux 3.3 (including) 3.4.97 (excluding)
Linux_kernel Linux 3.5 (including) 3.10.47 (excluding)
Linux_kernel Linux 3.11 (including) 3.12.25 (excluding)
Linux_kernel Linux 3.13 (including) 3.14.11 (excluding)
Linux_kernel Linux 3.15 (including) 3.15.4 (excluding)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 RedHat kernel-0:2.6.32-431.20.5.el6 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.2 Advanced Update Support RedHat kernel-0:2.6.32-220.53.1.el6 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.4 Extended Update Support RedHat kernel-0:2.6.32-358.46.2.el6 *
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 RedHat kernel-0:3.10.0-123.4.4.el7 *
Red Hat Enterprise MRG 2 RedHat kernel-rt-0:3.10.33-rt32.43.el6rt *
Linux Ubuntu lucid *
Linux Ubuntu precise *
Linux Ubuntu saucy *
Linux Ubuntu trusty *
Linux Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-armadaxp Ubuntu precise *
Linux-armadaxp Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-ec2 Ubuntu lucid *
Linux-ec2 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-flo Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-flo Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-fsl-imx51 Ubuntu lucid *
Linux-fsl-imx51 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-goldfish Ubuntu saucy *
Linux-goldfish Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-goldfish Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-grouper Ubuntu saucy *
Linux-grouper Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-grouper Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-grouper Ubuntu utopic *
Linux-linaro-omap Ubuntu precise *
Linux-linaro-omap Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-linaro-shared Ubuntu precise *
Linux-linaro-shared Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-linaro-vexpress Ubuntu precise *
Linux-linaro-vexpress Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-quantal Ubuntu precise *
Linux-lts-quantal Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-raring Ubuntu precise *
Linux-lts-raring Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-saucy Ubuntu precise *
Linux-lts-saucy Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-trusty Ubuntu precise *
Linux-lts-trusty Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-utopic Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-lts-vivid Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-maguro Ubuntu saucy *
Linux-maguro Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-maguro Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-mako Ubuntu saucy *
Linux-mako Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-mako Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-manta Ubuntu saucy *
Linux-manta Ubuntu trusty *
Linux-manta Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-mvl-dove Ubuntu lucid *
Linux-mvl-dove Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-qcm-msm Ubuntu lucid *
Linux-qcm-msm Ubuntu precise *
Linux-qcm-msm Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-raspi2 Ubuntu upstream *
Linux-raspi2 Ubuntu vivid/ubuntu-core *
Linux-ti-omap4 Ubuntu precise *
Linux-ti-omap4 Ubuntu saucy *
Linux-ti-omap4 Ubuntu upstream *

Extended Description

This can have security implications when the expected synchronization is in security-critical code, such as recording whether a user is authenticated or modifying important state information that should not be influenced by an outsider. A race condition occurs within concurrent environments, and is effectively a property of a code sequence. Depending on the context, a code sequence may be in the form of a function call, a small number of instructions, a series of program invocations, etc. A race condition violates these properties, which are closely related:

A race condition exists when an “interfering code sequence” can still access the shared resource, violating exclusivity. Programmers may assume that certain code sequences execute too quickly to be affected by an interfering code sequence; when they are not, this violates atomicity. For example, the single “x++” statement may appear atomic at the code layer, but it is actually non-atomic at the instruction layer, since it involves a read (the original value of x), followed by a computation (x+1), followed by a write (save the result to x). The interfering code sequence could be “trusted” or “untrusted.” A trusted interfering code sequence occurs within the product; it cannot be modified by the attacker, and it can only be invoked indirectly. An untrusted interfering code sequence can be authored directly by the attacker, and typically it is external to the vulnerable product.

Potential Mitigations

  • Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring.
  • Additionally, this will minimize the amount of synchronization necessary and may even help to reduce the likelihood of a denial of service where an attacker may be able to repeatedly trigger a critical section (CWE-400).

References