[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2024041805-rippling-entourage-1a72@gregkh>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 14:34:57 +0200
From: "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Siddh Raman Pant <siddh.raman.pant@...cle.com>
Cc: "cve@...nel.org" <cve@...nel.org>,
"linux-cve-announce@...r.kernel.org" <linux-cve-announce@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: CVE-2024-26920: tracing/trigger: Fix to return error if failed
to alloc snapshot
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 11:59:41AM +0000, Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> > In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
> >
> > tracing/trigger: Fix to return error if failed to alloc snapshot
> >
> > Fix register_snapshot_trigger() to return error code if it failed to
> > allocate a snapshot instead of 0 (success). Unless that, it will register
> > snapshot trigger without an error.
>
> This commit is problematic on 4.19.y, 5.4.y, 5.10.y, and 5.15.y,
> and should be reversed, and this CVE should be rejected for those
> versions.
Then please submit a patch for this.
But note, CVEs are not for specific versions, sorry. We give a hint as
to what kernel versions might be affected, but we don not assign CVE to
versions.
>
> The return value should be 0 on failure, because in the functions
> event_trigger_callback() and event_enable_trigger_func(), we have:
>
> ret = cmd_ops->reg(glob, trigger_ops, trigger_data, file);
> /*
> * The above returns on success the # of functions enabled,
> * but if it didn't find any functions it returns zero.
> * Consider no functions a failure too.
> */
> if (!ret) {
> ret = -ENOENT;
>
> Thus, the commit breaks this assumption.
>
> This commit needs b8cc44a4d3c1 ("tracing: Remove logic for registering
> multiple event triggers at a time") as a prerequisite, as it removes
> the above.
Should we just take that patch instead?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists