GHSA-X25X-HHPJ-PJQP

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-05-17 15:31 – Updated: 2025-09-25 18:30
VLAI
Details

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

bpf: Guard stack limits against 32bit overflow

This patch promotes the arithmetic around checking stack bounds to be done in the 64-bit domain, instead of the current 32bit. The arithmetic implies adding together a 64-bit register with a int offset. The register was checked to be below 1<<29 when it was variable, but not when it was fixed. The offset either comes from an instruction (in which case it is 16 bit), from another register (in which case the caller checked it to be below 1<<29 [1]), or from the size of an argument to a kfunc (in which case it can be a u32 [2]). Between the register being inconsistently checked to be below 1<<29, and the offset being up to an u32, it appears that we were open to overflowing the ints which were currently used for arithmetic.

[1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/815fb87b753055df2d9e50f6cd80eb10235fe3e9/kernel/bpf/verifier.c#L7494-L7498 [2] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/815fb87b753055df2d9e50f6cd80eb10235fe3e9/kernel/bpf/verifier.c#L11904

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-52676"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-190"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-05-17T15:15:18Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nbpf: Guard stack limits against 32bit overflow\n\nThis patch promotes the arithmetic around checking stack bounds to be\ndone in the 64-bit domain, instead of the current 32bit. The arithmetic\nimplies adding together a 64-bit register with a int offset. The\nregister was checked to be below 1\u003c\u003c29 when it was variable, but not\nwhen it was fixed. The offset either comes from an instruction (in which\ncase it is 16 bit), from another register (in which case the caller\nchecked it to be below 1\u003c\u003c29 [1]), or from the size of an argument to a\nkfunc (in which case it can be a u32 [2]). Between the register being\ninconsistently checked to be below 1\u003c\u003c29, and the offset being up to an\nu32, it appears that we were open to overflowing the `int`s which were\ncurrently used for arithmetic.\n\n[1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/815fb87b753055df2d9e50f6cd80eb10235fe3e9/kernel/bpf/verifier.c#L7494-L7498\n[2] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/815fb87b753055df2d9e50f6cd80eb10235fe3e9/kernel/bpf/verifier.c#L11904",
  "id": "GHSA-x25x-hhpj-pjqp",
  "modified": "2025-09-25T18:30:27Z",
  "published": "2024-05-17T15:31:11Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-52676"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1d38a9ee81570c4bd61f557832dead4d6f816760"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ad140fc856f0b1d5e2215bcb6d0cc247a86805a2"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e5ad9ecb84405637df82732ee02ad741a5f782a6"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}


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…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…