FKIE_CVE-2021-47604

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2024-06-19 15:15 - Updated: 2026-08-04 10:17
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: vduse: check that offset is within bounds in get_config() This condition checks "len" but it does not check "offset" and that could result in an out of bounds read if "offset > dev->config_size". The problem is that since both variables are unsigned the "dev->config_size - offset" subtraction would result in a very high unsigned value. I think these checks might not be necessary because "len" and "offset" are supposed to already have been validated using the vhost_vdpa_config_validate() function. But I do not know the code perfectly, and I like to be safe.
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
linux linux_kernel *

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "Linux",
          "programFiles": [
            "drivers/vdpa/vdpa_user/vduse_dev.c"
          ],
          "repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git",
          "vendor": "Linux",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "ebbbc5fea3f648175df1aa3f127c78eb0252cc2a",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "c8a6153b6c59d95c0e091f053f6f180952ade91e",
              "versionType": "git"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "dc1db0060c02d119fd4196924eff2d1129e9a442",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "c8a6153b6c59d95c0e091f053f6f180952ade91e",
              "versionType": "git"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "defaultStatus": "affected",
          "product": "Linux",
          "programFiles": [
            "drivers/vdpa/vdpa_user/vduse_dev.c"
          ],
          "repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git",
          "vendor": "Linux",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "5.15"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "5.15",
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "5.15.*",
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "5.15.11",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "*",
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "5.16",
              "versionType": "original_commit_for_fix"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67"
    }
  ],
  "configurations": [
    {
      "nodes": [
        {
          "cpeMatch": [
            {
              "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "matchCriteriaId": "7A70FD7B-2EDC-4C3B-ADE0-880AA759CDD7",
              "versionEndExcluding": "5.15.11",
              "versionStartIncluding": "5.15",
              "vulnerable": true
            }
          ],
          "negate": false,
          "operator": "OR"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nvduse: check that offset is within bounds in get_config()\n\nThis condition checks \"len\" but it does not check \"offset\" and that\ncould result in an out of bounds read if \"offset \u003e dev-\u003econfig_size\".\nThe problem is that since both variables are unsigned the\n\"dev-\u003econfig_size - offset\" subtraction would result in a very high\nunsigned value.\n\nI think these checks might not be necessary because \"len\" and \"offset\"\nare supposed to already have been validated using the\nvhost_vdpa_config_validate() function.  But I do not know the code\nperfectly, and I like to be safe."
    },
    {
      "lang": "es",
      "value": "En el kernel de Linux, se ha resuelto la siguiente vulnerabilidad: vduse: verifique que el desplazamiento est\u00e9 dentro de los l\u00edmites en get_config() Esta condici\u00f3n verifica \"len\" pero no verifica \"desplazamiento\" y eso podr\u00eda resultar en una lectura fuera de los l\u00edmites si \" desplazamiento \u0026gt; dev-\u0026gt;config_size\". El problema es que, dado que ambas variables no est\u00e1n firmadas, la resta \"dev-\u0026gt;config_size - offset\" dar\u00eda como resultado un valor sin firmar muy alto. Creo que estas comprobaciones podr\u00edan no ser necesarias porque se supone que \"len\" y \"offset\" ya se han validado mediante la funci\u00f3n vhost_vdpa_config_validate(). Pero no conozco el c\u00f3digo a la perfecci\u00f3n y me gusta estar seguro."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2021-47604",
  "lastModified": "2026-08-04T10:17:10.467",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackVector": "LOCAL",
          "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
          "baseScore": 7.1,
          "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
          "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
          "integrityImpact": "NONE",
          "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 1.8,
        "impactScore": 5.2,
        "source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
        "type": "Secondary"
      },
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackVector": "LOCAL",
          "availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
          "baseScore": 7.1,
          "baseSeverity": "HIGH",
          "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
          "integrityImpact": "NONE",
          "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 1.8,
        "impactScore": 5.2,
        "source": "nvd@nist.gov",
        "type": "Primary"
      }
    ],
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2021-47604",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "none"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "no"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "partial"
            }
          ],
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "timestamp": "2024-09-10T17:12:14.372380Z",
          "version": "2.0.3"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2024-06-19T15:15:54.973",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
      "tags": [
        "Patch"
      ],
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/dc1db0060c02d119fd4196924eff2d1129e9a442"
    },
    {
      "source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
      "tags": [
        "Patch"
      ],
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ebbbc5fea3f648175df1aa3f127c78eb0252cc2a"
    },
    {
      "source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
      "tags": [
        "Patch"
      ],
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/dc1db0060c02d119fd4196924eff2d1129e9a442"
    },
    {
      "source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
      "tags": [
        "Patch"
      ],
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ebbbc5fea3f648175df1aa3f127c78eb0252cc2a"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
  "vulnStatus": "Modified",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-125"
        }
      ],
      "source": "nvd@nist.gov",
      "type": "Primary"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Related by attack behaviour

Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.


Loading…