linux-kernel - Re: CVE-2024-39362: i2c: acpi: Unbind mux adapters before delete

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2024070209-tapping-satchel-a949@gregkh>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 21:16:07 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>
Cc: cve@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Hamish Martin <Hamish.Martin@...iedtelesis.co.nz>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
Subject: Re: CVE-2024-39362: i2c: acpi: Unbind mux adapters before delete

On Tue, Jul 02, 2024 at 07:05:19PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Tue, 2024-06-25 at 16:22 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
> > 
> > i2c: acpi: Unbind mux adapters before delete
> > (...)
> > 
> > The Linux kernel CVE team has assigned CVE-2024-39362 to this issue.
> 
> I would like to dispute this CVE. I don't quite understand how this bug
> qualifies as a security bug, considering that only root can load and
> unload overlay SSDT tables. The bug can't be triggered on purpose by a
> remote or local unprivileged user.
> 
> The bug causes a warning to be dumped to the kernel log, due to trying
> to unbind a companion device which is already unbound, but as far as I
> can see, that's all. acpi_unbind_one() is a best-effort function, it
> returns 0 no matter what. kernfs_remove_by_ame_ns() will gracefully
> return an error code. I can't see any obvious use-after-free happening
> so I see no way an attacker could exploit this bug.
> 
> So I would cancel this CVE.

Now rejected, thanks for the information.

thanks,

greg k-h