linux-kernel - Re: CVE-2024-49993: iommu/vt-d: Fix potential lockup if qi_submit

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20241029114008.2436272-1-jackmanb@google.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 11:40:08 +0000
From: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>
To: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc: cve@...nel.org, linux-cve-announce@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kpsing@...gle.com, ciprietti@...gle.com, 
	melotti@...gle.com, sanjay.k.kumar@...el.com
Subject: Re: CVE-2024-49993: iommu/vt-d: Fix potential lockup if
 qi_submit_sync called with 0 count

Hi Greg,

> Currently, there is no impact
> by this bug on the existing users because no callers are submitting
> invalidations with 0 descriptors.

I think this CVE could be discarded, the count arg is always hard-coded to 1.
The buggy function isn't even exposed to modules so I think even if we care
about out-of-tree code we should be OK here. (But based on [1] it sounds like
out-of-tree code is probably out-of-scope for kernel CVEs anyway?)

[1] https://docs.kernel.org/process/cve.html#invalid-cves

FWIW, I don't have any burning desire to kill this CVE in particular, I'm just
testing the water to see if this is one reasonable way we could share some
triage effort among consumers of kernel CVEs...

Cheers,
Brendan