CVE-2024-27013

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

tun: limit printing rate when illegal packet received by tun dev

vhost_worker will call tun call backs to receive packets. If too many illegal packets arrives, tun_do_read will keep dumping packet contents. When console is enabled, it will costs much more cpu time to dump packet and soft lockup will be detected.

net_ratelimit mechanism can be used to limit the dumping rate.

PID: 33036 TASK: ffff949da6f20000 CPU: 23 COMMAND: vhost-32980 #0 [fffffe00003fce50] crash_nmi_callback at ffffffff89249253 #1 [fffffe00003fce58] nmi_handle at ffffffff89225fa3 #2 [fffffe00003fceb0] default_do_nmi at ffffffff8922642e #3 [fffffe00003fced0] do_nmi at ffffffff8922660d #4 [fffffe00003fcef0] end_repeat_nmi at ffffffff89c01663 [exception RIP: io_serial_in+20] RIP: ffffffff89792594 RSP: ffffa655314979e8 RFLAGS: 00000002 RAX: ffffffff89792500 RBX: ffffffff8af428a0 RCX: 0000000000000000 RDX: 00000000000003fd RSI: 0000000000000005 RDI: ffffffff8af428a0 RBP: 0000000000002710 R8: 0000000000000004 R9: 000000000000000f R10: 0000000000000000 R11: ffffffff8acbf64f R12: 0000000000000020 R13: ffffffff8acbf698 R14: 0000000000000058 R15: 0000000000000000 ORIG_RAX: ffffffffffffffff CS: 0010 SS: 0018 #5 [ffffa655314979e8] io_serial_in at ffffffff89792594 #6 [ffffa655314979e8] wait_for_xmitr at ffffffff89793470 #7 [ffffa65531497a08] serial8250_console_putchar at ffffffff897934f6 #8 [ffffa65531497a20] uart_console_write at ffffffff8978b605 #9 [ffffa65531497a48] serial8250_console_write at ffffffff89796558 #10 [ffffa65531497ac8] console_unlock at ffffffff89316124 #11 [ffffa65531497b10] vprintk_emit at ffffffff89317c07 #12 [ffffa65531497b68] printk at ffffffff89318306 #13 [ffffa65531497bc8] print_hex_dump at ffffffff89650765 #14 [ffffa65531497ca8] tun_do_read at ffffffffc0b06c27 [tun] #15 [ffffa65531497d38] tun_recvmsg at ffffffffc0b06e34 [tun] #16 [ffffa65531497d68] handle_rx at ffffffffc0c5d682 [vhost_net] #17 [ffffa65531497ed0] vhost_worker at ffffffffc0c644dc [vhost] #18 [ffffa65531497f10] kthread at ffffffff892d2e72 #19 [ffffa65531497f50] ret_from_fork at ffffffff89c0022f

Weakness

The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated, in violation of the intended security policy for that actor.

Affected Software

Extended Description

Code frequently has to work with limited resources, so programmers must be careful to ensure that resources are not consumed too quickly, or too easily. Without use of quotas, resource limits, or other protection mechanisms, it can be easy for an attacker to consume many resources by rapidly making many requests, or causing larger resources to be used than is needed. When too many resources are allocated, or if a single resource is too large, then it can prevent the code from working correctly, possibly leading to a denial of service.

Potential Mitigations

• Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.

• When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”

• Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.

• 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 can be difficult to effectively institute – and even when properly done, it does not provide a full solution. It simply requires more resources on the part of the attacker.

• If the program must fail, ensure that it fails gracefully (fails closed). There may be a temptation to simply let the program fail poorly in cases such as low memory conditions, but an attacker may be able to assert control before the software has fully exited. Alternately, an uncontrolled failure could cause cascading problems with other downstream components; for example, the program could send a signal to a downstream process so the process immediately knows that a problem has occurred and has a better chance of recovery.

• Ensure that all failures in resource allocation place the system into a safe posture.

• Use resource-limiting settings provided by the operating system or environment. For example, when managing system resources in POSIX, setrlimit() can be used to set limits for certain types of resources, and getrlimit() can determine how many resources are available. However, these functions are not available on all operating systems.

• When the current levels get close to the maximum that is defined for the application (see CWE-770), then limit the allocation of further resources to privileged users; alternately, begin releasing resources for less-privileged users. While this mitigation may protect the system from attack, it will not necessarily stop attackers from adversely impacting other users.

• Ensure that the application performs the appropriate error checks and error handling in case resources become unavailable (CWE-703).

Related Attack Patterns

• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/125.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/130.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/147.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/197.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/229.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/230.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/231.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/469.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/482.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/486.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/487.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/488.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/489.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/490.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/491.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/493.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/494.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/495.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/496.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/528.html

References

• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/14cdb43dbc827e18ac7d5b30c5b4c676219f1421
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/40f4ced305c6c47487d3cd8da54676e2acc1a6ad
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4b0dcae5c4797bf31c63011ed62917210d3fdac3
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/52854101180beccdb9dc2077a3bea31b6ad48dfa
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/62e27ef18eb4f0d33bbae8e9ef56b99696a74713
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/68459b8e3ee554ce71878af9eb69659b9462c588
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a50dbeca28acf7051dfa92786b85f704c75db6eb
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f8bbc07ac535593139c875ffa19af924b1084540