GHSA-V8RF-QJ3W-FQ5C
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-06-19 15:30 – Updated: 2024-10-31 15:30In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
btrfs: use latest_dev in btrfs_show_devname
The test case btrfs/238 reports the warning below:
WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 481 at fs/btrfs/super.c:2509 btrfs_show_devname+0x104/0x1e8 [btrfs] CPU: 2 PID: 1 Comm: systemd Tainted: G W O 5.14.0-rc1-custom #72 Hardware name: QEMU QEMU Virtual Machine, BIOS 0.0.0 02/06/2015 Call trace: btrfs_show_devname+0x108/0x1b4 [btrfs] show_mountinfo+0x234/0x2c4 m_show+0x28/0x34 seq_read_iter+0x12c/0x3c4 vfs_read+0x29c/0x2c8 ksys_read+0x80/0xec __arm64_sys_read+0x28/0x34 invoke_syscall+0x50/0xf8 do_el0_svc+0x88/0x138 el0_svc+0x2c/0x8c el0t_64_sync_handler+0x84/0xe4 el0t_64_sync+0x198/0x19c
Reason: While btrfs_prepare_sprout() moves the fs_devices::devices into fs_devices::seed_list, the btrfs_show_devname() searches for the devices and found none, leading to the warning as in above.
Fix: latest_dev is updated according to the changes to the device list. That means we could use the latest_dev->name to show the device name in /proc/self/mounts, the pointer will be always valid as it's assigned before the device is deleted from the list in remove or replace. The RCU protection is sufficient as the device structure is freed after synchronization.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2021-47599"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-362"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-06-19T15:15:54Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nbtrfs: use latest_dev in btrfs_show_devname\n\nThe test case btrfs/238 reports the warning below:\n\n WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 481 at fs/btrfs/super.c:2509 btrfs_show_devname+0x104/0x1e8 [btrfs]\n CPU: 2 PID: 1 Comm: systemd Tainted: G W O 5.14.0-rc1-custom #72\n Hardware name: QEMU QEMU Virtual Machine, BIOS 0.0.0 02/06/2015\n Call trace:\n btrfs_show_devname+0x108/0x1b4 [btrfs]\n show_mountinfo+0x234/0x2c4\n m_show+0x28/0x34\n seq_read_iter+0x12c/0x3c4\n vfs_read+0x29c/0x2c8\n ksys_read+0x80/0xec\n __arm64_sys_read+0x28/0x34\n invoke_syscall+0x50/0xf8\n do_el0_svc+0x88/0x138\n el0_svc+0x2c/0x8c\n el0t_64_sync_handler+0x84/0xe4\n el0t_64_sync+0x198/0x19c\n\nReason:\nWhile btrfs_prepare_sprout() moves the fs_devices::devices into\nfs_devices::seed_list, the btrfs_show_devname() searches for the devices\nand found none, leading to the warning as in above.\n\nFix:\nlatest_dev is updated according to the changes to the device list.\nThat means we could use the latest_dev-\u003ename to show the device name in\n/proc/self/mounts, the pointer will be always valid as it\u0027s assigned\nbefore the device is deleted from the list in remove or replace.\nThe RCU protection is sufficient as the device structure is freed after\nsynchronization.",
"id": "GHSA-v8rf-qj3w-fq5c",
"modified": "2024-10-31T15:30:58Z",
"published": "2024-06-19T15:30:55Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2021-47599"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/6605fd2f394bba0a0059df2b6cfc87b0b6d393a2"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e342c2558016ead462f376b6c6c2ac5efc17f3b1"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.
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.
Vulnerability timeline
Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC
How durations are calculated
Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.
Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.
Loading timeline…
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
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.