{"dataType": "CVE_RECORD", "dataVersion": "5.1", "cveMetadata": {"cveId": "CVE-2024-26732", "assignerOrgId": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67", "state": "PUBLISHED", "assignerShortName": "Linux", "dateReserved": "2024-02-19T14:20:24.165Z", "datePublished": "2024-04-03T17:00:19.722Z", "dateUpdated": "2024-11-05T09:14:43.384Z"}, "containers": {"cna": {"providerMetadata": {"orgId": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67", "shortName": "Linux", "dateUpdated": "2024-11-05T09:14:43.384Z"}, "descriptions": [{"lang": "en", "value": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nnet: implement lockless setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF)\n\nsyzbot reported a lockdep violation [1] involving af_unix\nsupport of SO_PEEK_OFF.\n\nSince SO_PEEK_OFF is inherently not thread safe (it uses a per-socket\nsk_peek_off field), there is really no point to enforce a pointless\nthread safety in the kernel.\n\nAfter this patch :\n\n- setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF) no longer acquires the socket lock.\n\n- skb_consume_udp() no longer has to acquire the socket lock.\n\n- af_unix no longer needs a special version of sk_set_peek_off(),\n because it does not lock u->iolock anymore.\n\nAs a followup, we could replace prot->set_peek_off to be a boolean\nand avoid an indirect call, since we always use sk_set_peek_off().\n\n[1]\n\nWARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected\n6.8.0-rc4-syzkaller-00267-g0f1dd5e91e2b #0 Not tainted\n\nsyz-executor.2/30025 is trying to acquire lock:\n ffff8880765e7d80 (&u->iolock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: unix_set_peek_off+0x26/0xa0 net/unix/af_unix.c:789\n\nbut task is already holding lock:\n ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline]\n ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sockopt_lock_sock net/core/sock.c:1060 [inline]\n ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sk_setsockopt+0xe52/0x3360 net/core/sock.c:1193\n\nwhich lock already depends on the new lock.\n\nthe existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:\n\n-> #1 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}:\n lock_acquire+0x1e3/0x530 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754\n lock_sock_nested+0x48/0x100 net/core/sock.c:3524\n lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline]\n __unix_dgram_recvmsg+0x1275/0x12c0 net/unix/af_unix.c:2415\n sock_recvmsg_nosec+0x18e/0x1d0 net/socket.c:1046\n ____sys_recvmsg+0x3c0/0x470 net/socket.c:2801\n ___sys_recvmsg net/socket.c:2845 [inline]\n do_recvmmsg+0x474/0xae0 net/socket.c:2939\n __sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3018 [inline]\n __do_sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3041 [inline]\n __se_sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3034 [inline]\n __x64_sys_recvmmsg+0x199/0x250 net/socket.c:3034\n do_syscall_64+0xf9/0x240\n entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6f/0x77\n\n-> #0 (&u->iolock){+.+.}-{3:3}:\n check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3134 [inline]\n check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3253 [inline]\n validate_chain+0x18ca/0x58e0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3869\n __lock_acquire+0x1345/0x1fd0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5137\n lock_acquire+0x1e3/0x530 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754\n __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:608 [inline]\n __mutex_lock+0x136/0xd70 kernel/locking/mutex.c:752\n unix_set_peek_off+0x26/0xa0 net/unix/af_unix.c:789\n sk_setsockopt+0x207e/0x3360\n do_sock_setsockopt+0x2fb/0x720 net/socket.c:2307\n __sys_setsockopt+0x1ad/0x250 net/socket.c:2334\n __do_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2343 [inline]\n __se_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2340 [inline]\n __x64_sys_setsockopt+0xb5/0xd0 net/socket.c:2340\n do_syscall_64+0xf9/0x240\n entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6f/0x77\n\nother info that might help us debug this:\n\n Possible unsafe locking scenario:\n\n CPU0 CPU1\n ---- ----\n lock(sk_lock-AF_UNIX);\n lock(&u->iolock);\n lock(sk_lock-AF_UNIX);\n lock(&u->iolock);\n\n *** DEADLOCK ***\n\n1 lock held by syz-executor.2/30025:\n #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline]\n #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sockopt_lock_sock net/core/sock.c:1060 [inline]\n #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sk_setsockopt+0xe52/0x3360 net/core/sock.c:1193\n\nstack backtrace:\nCPU: 0 PID: 30025 Comm: syz-executor.2 Not tainted 6.8.0-rc4-syzkaller-00267-g0f1dd5e91e2b #0\nHardware name: Google Google C\n---truncated---"}], "affected": [{"product": "Linux", "vendor": "Linux", "defaultStatus": "unaffected", "repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git", "programFiles": ["net/core/sock.c", "net/ipv4/udp.c", "net/unix/af_unix.c"], "versions": [{"version": "859051dd165e", "lessThan": "897f75e2cde8", "status": "affected", "versionType": "git"}, {"version": "859051dd165e", "lessThan": "56667da7399e", "status": "affected", "versionType": "git"}]}, {"product": "Linux", "vendor": "Linux", "defaultStatus": "affected", "repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git", "programFiles": ["net/core/sock.c", "net/ipv4/udp.c", "net/unix/af_unix.c"], "versions": [{"version": "6.7", "status": "affected"}, {"version": "0", "lessThan": "6.7", "status": "unaffected", "versionType": "semver"}, {"version": "6.7.7", "lessThanOrEqual": "6.7.*", "status": "unaffected", "versionType": "semver"}, {"version": "6.8", "lessThanOrEqual": "*", "status": "unaffected", "versionType": "original_commit_for_fix"}]}], "references": [{"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/897f75e2cde8a5f9f7529b55249af1fa4248c83b"}, {"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/56667da7399eb19af857e30f41bea89aa6fa812c"}], "title": "net: implement lockless setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF)", "x_generator": {"engine": "bippy-9e1c9544281a"}}, "adp": [{"metrics": [{"other": {"type": "ssvc", "content": {"timestamp": "2024-06-17T19:28:35.916343Z", "id": "CVE-2024-26732", "options": [{"Exploitation": "none"}, {"Automatable": "no"}, {"Technical Impact": "partial"}], "role": "CISA Coordinator", "version": "2.0.3"}}}], "title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment", "providerMetadata": {"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0", "shortName": "CISA-ADP", "dateUpdated": "2024-06-17T19:28:53.102Z"}}, {"providerMetadata": {"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108", "shortName": "CVE", "dateUpdated": "2024-08-02T00:14:12.930Z"}, "title": "CVE Program Container", "references": [{"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/897f75e2cde8a5f9f7529b55249af1fa4248c83b", "tags": ["x_transferred"]}, {"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/56667da7399eb19af857e30f41bea89aa6fa812c", "tags": ["x_transferred"]}]}]}}

{"dataType": "CVE_RECORD", "containers": {"adp": [{"title": "CVE Program Container", "references": [{"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/897f75e2cde8a5f9f7529b55249af1fa4248c83b", "tags": ["x_transferred"]}, {"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/56667da7399eb19af857e30f41bea89aa6fa812c", "tags": ["x_transferred"]}], "providerMetadata": {"orgId": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108", "shortName": "CVE", "dateUpdated": "2024-08-02T00:14:12.930Z"}}, {"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment", "metrics": [{"other": {"type": "ssvc", "content": {"id": "CVE-2024-26732", "role": "CISA Coordinator", "options": [{"Exploitation": "none"}, {"Automatable": "no"}, {"Technical Impact": "partial"}], "version": "2.0.3", "timestamp": "2024-06-17T19:28:35.916343Z"}}}], "providerMetadata": {"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0", "shortName": "CISA-ADP", "dateUpdated": "2024-06-17T19:28:49.881Z"}}], "cna": {"title": "net: implement lockless setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF)", "affected": [{"repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git", "vendor": "Linux", "product": "Linux", "versions": [{"status": "affected", "version": "859051dd165e", "lessThan": "897f75e2cde8", "versionType": "git"}, {"status": "affected", "version": "859051dd165e", "lessThan": "56667da7399e", "versionType": "git"}], "programFiles": ["net/core/sock.c", "net/ipv4/udp.c", "net/unix/af_unix.c"], "defaultStatus": "unaffected"}, {"repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git", "vendor": "Linux", "product": "Linux", "versions": [{"status": "affected", "version": "6.7"}, {"status": "unaffected", "version": "0", "lessThan": "6.7", "versionType": "semver"}, {"status": "unaffected", "version": "6.7.7", "versionType": "semver", "lessThanOrEqual": "6.7.*"}, {"status": "unaffected", "version": "6.8", "versionType": "original_commit_for_fix", "lessThanOrEqual": "*"}], "programFiles": ["net/core/sock.c", "net/ipv4/udp.c", "net/unix/af_unix.c"], "defaultStatus": "affected"}], "references": [{"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/897f75e2cde8a5f9f7529b55249af1fa4248c83b"}, {"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/56667da7399eb19af857e30f41bea89aa6fa812c"}], "x_generator": {"engine": "bippy-9e1c9544281a"}, "descriptions": [{"lang": "en", "value": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nnet: implement lockless setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF)\n\nsyzbot reported a lockdep violation [1] involving af_unix\nsupport of SO_PEEK_OFF.\n\nSince SO_PEEK_OFF is inherently not thread safe (it uses a per-socket\nsk_peek_off field), there is really no point to enforce a pointless\nthread safety in the kernel.\n\nAfter this patch :\n\n- setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF) no longer acquires the socket lock.\n\n- skb_consume_udp() no longer has to acquire the socket lock.\n\n- af_unix no longer needs a special version of sk_set_peek_off(),\n because it does not lock u->iolock anymore.\n\nAs a followup, we could replace prot->set_peek_off to be a boolean\nand avoid an indirect call, since we always use sk_set_peek_off().\n\n[1]\n\nWARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected\n6.8.0-rc4-syzkaller-00267-g0f1dd5e91e2b #0 Not tainted\n\nsyz-executor.2/30025 is trying to acquire lock:\n ffff8880765e7d80 (&u->iolock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: unix_set_peek_off+0x26/0xa0 net/unix/af_unix.c:789\n\nbut task is already holding lock:\n ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline]\n ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sockopt_lock_sock net/core/sock.c:1060 [inline]\n ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sk_setsockopt+0xe52/0x3360 net/core/sock.c:1193\n\nwhich lock already depends on the new lock.\n\nthe existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:\n\n-> #1 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}:\n lock_acquire+0x1e3/0x530 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754\n lock_sock_nested+0x48/0x100 net/core/sock.c:3524\n lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline]\n __unix_dgram_recvmsg+0x1275/0x12c0 net/unix/af_unix.c:2415\n sock_recvmsg_nosec+0x18e/0x1d0 net/socket.c:1046\n ____sys_recvmsg+0x3c0/0x470 net/socket.c:2801\n ___sys_recvmsg net/socket.c:2845 [inline]\n do_recvmmsg+0x474/0xae0 net/socket.c:2939\n __sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3018 [inline]\n __do_sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3041 [inline]\n __se_sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3034 [inline]\n __x64_sys_recvmmsg+0x199/0x250 net/socket.c:3034\n do_syscall_64+0xf9/0x240\n entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6f/0x77\n\n-> #0 (&u->iolock){+.+.}-{3:3}:\n check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3134 [inline]\n check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3253 [inline]\n validate_chain+0x18ca/0x58e0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3869\n __lock_acquire+0x1345/0x1fd0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5137\n lock_acquire+0x1e3/0x530 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754\n __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:608 [inline]\n __mutex_lock+0x136/0xd70 kernel/locking/mutex.c:752\n unix_set_peek_off+0x26/0xa0 net/unix/af_unix.c:789\n sk_setsockopt+0x207e/0x3360\n do_sock_setsockopt+0x2fb/0x720 net/socket.c:2307\n __sys_setsockopt+0x1ad/0x250 net/socket.c:2334\n __do_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2343 [inline]\n __se_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2340 [inline]\n __x64_sys_setsockopt+0xb5/0xd0 net/socket.c:2340\n do_syscall_64+0xf9/0x240\n entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6f/0x77\n\nother info that might help us debug this:\n\n Possible unsafe locking scenario:\n\n CPU0 CPU1\n ---- ----\n lock(sk_lock-AF_UNIX);\n lock(&u->iolock);\n lock(sk_lock-AF_UNIX);\n lock(&u->iolock);\n\n *** DEADLOCK ***\n\n1 lock held by syz-executor.2/30025:\n #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline]\n #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sockopt_lock_sock net/core/sock.c:1060 [inline]\n #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sk_setsockopt+0xe52/0x3360 net/core/sock.c:1193\n\nstack backtrace:\nCPU: 0 PID: 30025 Comm: syz-executor.2 Not tainted 6.8.0-rc4-syzkaller-00267-g0f1dd5e91e2b #0\nHardware name: Google Google C\n---truncated---"}], "providerMetadata": {"orgId": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67", "shortName": "Linux", "dateUpdated": "2024-11-05T09:14:43.384Z"}}}, "cveMetadata": {"cveId": "CVE-2024-26732", "state": "PUBLISHED", "dateUpdated": "2024-11-05T09:14:43.384Z", "dateReserved": "2024-02-19T14:20:24.165Z", "assignerOrgId": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67", "datePublished": "2024-04-03T17:00:19.722Z", "assignerShortName": "Linux"}, "dataVersion": "5.1"}

{"cveTags": [], "descriptions": [{"lang": "en", "value": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nnet: implement lockless setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF)\n\nsyzbot reported a lockdep violation [1] involving af_unix\nsupport of SO_PEEK_OFF.\n\nSince SO_PEEK_OFF is inherently not thread safe (it uses a per-socket\nsk_peek_off field), there is really no point to enforce a pointless\nthread safety in the kernel.\n\nAfter this patch :\n\n- setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF) no longer acquires the socket lock.\n\n- skb_consume_udp() no longer has to acquire the socket lock.\n\n- af_unix no longer needs a special version of sk_set_peek_off(),\n because it does not lock u->iolock anymore.\n\nAs a followup, we could replace prot->set_peek_off to be a boolean\nand avoid an indirect call, since we always use sk_set_peek_off().\n\n[1]\n\nWARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected\n6.8.0-rc4-syzkaller-00267-g0f1dd5e91e2b #0 Not tainted\n\nsyz-executor.2/30025 is trying to acquire lock:\n ffff8880765e7d80 (&u->iolock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: unix_set_peek_off+0x26/0xa0 net/unix/af_unix.c:789\n\nbut task is already holding lock:\n ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline]\n ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sockopt_lock_sock net/core/sock.c:1060 [inline]\n ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sk_setsockopt+0xe52/0x3360 net/core/sock.c:1193\n\nwhich lock already depends on the new lock.\n\nthe existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:\n\n-> #1 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}:\n lock_acquire+0x1e3/0x530 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754\n lock_sock_nested+0x48/0x100 net/core/sock.c:3524\n lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline]\n __unix_dgram_recvmsg+0x1275/0x12c0 net/unix/af_unix.c:2415\n sock_recvmsg_nosec+0x18e/0x1d0 net/socket.c:1046\n ____sys_recvmsg+0x3c0/0x470 net/socket.c:2801\n ___sys_recvmsg net/socket.c:2845 [inline]\n do_recvmmsg+0x474/0xae0 net/socket.c:2939\n __sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3018 [inline]\n __do_sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3041 [inline]\n __se_sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3034 [inline]\n __x64_sys_recvmmsg+0x199/0x250 net/socket.c:3034\n do_syscall_64+0xf9/0x240\n entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6f/0x77\n\n-> #0 (&u->iolock){+.+.}-{3:3}:\n check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3134 [inline]\n check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3253 [inline]\n validate_chain+0x18ca/0x58e0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3869\n __lock_acquire+0x1345/0x1fd0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5137\n lock_acquire+0x1e3/0x530 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754\n __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:608 [inline]\n __mutex_lock+0x136/0xd70 kernel/locking/mutex.c:752\n unix_set_peek_off+0x26/0xa0 net/unix/af_unix.c:789\n sk_setsockopt+0x207e/0x3360\n do_sock_setsockopt+0x2fb/0x720 net/socket.c:2307\n __sys_setsockopt+0x1ad/0x250 net/socket.c:2334\n __do_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2343 [inline]\n __se_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2340 [inline]\n __x64_sys_setsockopt+0xb5/0xd0 net/socket.c:2340\n do_syscall_64+0xf9/0x240\n entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6f/0x77\n\nother info that might help us debug this:\n\n Possible unsafe locking scenario:\n\n CPU0 CPU1\n ---- ----\n lock(sk_lock-AF_UNIX);\n lock(&u->iolock);\n lock(sk_lock-AF_UNIX);\n lock(&u->iolock);\n\n *** DEADLOCK ***\n\n1 lock held by syz-executor.2/30025:\n #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline]\n #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sockopt_lock_sock net/core/sock.c:1060 [inline]\n #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sk_setsockopt+0xe52/0x3360 net/core/sock.c:1193\n\nstack backtrace:\nCPU: 0 PID: 30025 Comm: syz-executor.2 Not tainted 6.8.0-rc4-syzkaller-00267-g0f1dd5e91e2b #0\nHardware name: Google Google C\n---truncated---"}, {"lang": "es", "value": "En el kernel de Linux, se resolvi\u00f3 la siguiente vulnerabilidad: net: implementar lockless setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF) syzbot inform\u00f3 una violaci\u00f3n de lockdep [1] que involucraba el soporte de SO_PEEK_OFF por parte de af_unix. Dado que SO_PEEK_OFF no es inherentemente seguro para subprocesos (utiliza un campo sk_peek_off por socket), realmente no tiene sentido imponer una seguridad de subprocesos in\u00fatil en el kernel. Despu\u00e9s de este parche: - setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF) ya no adquiere el bloqueo del socket. - skb_consume_udp() ya no tiene que adquirir el bloqueo del socket. - af_unix ya no necesita una versi\u00f3n especial de sk_set_peek_off(), porque ya no bloquea u->iolock. Como seguimiento, podr\u00edamos reemplazar prot->set_peek_off para que sea booleano y evitar una llamada indirecta, ya que siempre usamos sk_set_peek_off(). [1] ADVERTENCIA: posible dependencia de bloqueo circular detectada 6.8.0-rc4-syzkaller-00267-g0f1dd5e91e2b #0 No contaminado syz-executor.2/30025 est\u00e1 intentando adquirir el bloqueo: ffff8880765e7d80 (&u->iolock){+.+. }-{3:3}, en: unix_set_peek_off+0x26/0xa0 net/unix/af_unix.c:789 pero la tarea ya mantiene el bloqueo: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, en: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [en l\u00ednea] ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, en: sockopt_lock_sock net/core/sock.c:1060 [en l\u00ednea] ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, en: sk_setsockopt+0xe52/0x3360 net/core/sock.c:1193 cuyo bloqueo ya depende del nuevo bloqueo. la cadena de dependencia existente (en orden inverso) es: -> #1 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}: lock_acquire+0x1e3/0x530 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754 lock_sock_nested+0x48 /0x100 net/core/sock.c:3524 lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [en l\u00ednea] __unix_dgram_recvmsg+0x1275/0x12c0 net/unix/af_unix.c:2415 sock_recvmsg_nosec+0x18e/0x1d0 net/socket.c:1046 ____sys_recvmsg+0x3c0/0x470 net/socket.c:2801 ___sys_recvmsg net/socket.c:2845 [en l\u00ednea] do_recvmmsg+0x474/0xae0 net/socket.c:2939 __sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3018 [en l\u00ednea] __do_sy s_recvmmsg red/socket .c:3041 [en l\u00ednea] __se_sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3034 [en l\u00ednea] __x64_sys_recvmmsg+0x199/0x250 net/socket.c:3034 do_syscall_64+0xf9/0x240 Entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6f/0x77 -> #0 (&u->iolock) {+.+.}-{3:3}: check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3134 [en l\u00ednea] check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3253 [en l\u00ednea] validar_chain+0x18ca/0x58e0 kernel/locking/lockdep. c:3869 __lock_acquire+0x1345/0x1fd0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5137 lock_acquire+0x1e3/0x530 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754 __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:608 [en l\u00ednea] __mutex_lock+0x136/0xd70 kernel /locking/mutex.c:752 unix_set_peek_off+0x26/0xa0 net/unix/af_unix.c:789 sk_setsockopt+0x207e/0x3360 do_sock_setsockopt+0x2fb/0x720 net/socket.c:2307 __sys_setsockopt+0x1ad/0x250 net/ enchufe.c: 2334 __do_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2343 [en l\u00ednea] __se_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2340 [en l\u00ednea] __x64_sys_setsockopt+0xb5/0xd0 net/socket.c:2340 do_syscall_64+0xf9/0x240 entrada_SYSCALL_6 4_after_hwframe+0x6f/0x77 otra informaci\u00f3n que podr\u00eda ayudar depuremos esto: Posible escenario de bloqueo inseguro: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(sk_lock-AF_UNIX); bloquear(&u->iolock); bloquear(sk_lock-AF_UNIX); bloquear(&u->iolock); *** DEADLOCK *** 1 bloqueo retenido por syz-executor.2/30025: #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, en: lock_sock include/net/sock. h:1691 [en l\u00ednea] #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, en: sockopt_lock_sock net/core/sock.c:1060 [en l\u00ednea] #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock- AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, en: sk_setsockopt+0xe52/0x3360 net/core/sock.c:1193 seguimiento de pila: CPU: 0 PID: 30025 Comm: syz-executor.2 No contaminado 6.8 .0-rc4-syzkaller-00267-g0f1dd5e91e2b #0 Nombre del hardware: Google Google C ---truncado---"}], "id": "CVE-2024-26732", "lastModified": "2024-04-03T17:24:18.150", "metrics": {}, "published": "2024-04-03T17:15:50.977", "references": [{"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67", "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/56667da7399eb19af857e30f41bea89aa6fa812c"}, {"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67", "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/897f75e2cde8a5f9f7529b55249af1fa4248c83b"}], "sourceIdentifier": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67", "vulnStatus": "Awaiting Analysis"}

{"bugzilla": {"description": "kernel: net: implement lockless setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF)", "id": "2273250", "url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2273250"}, "csaw": false, "cvss3": {"cvss3_base_score": "5.5", "cvss3_scoring_vector": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H", "status": "draft"}, "cwe": "CWE-833", "details": ["In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\nnet: implement lockless setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF)\nsyzbot reported a lockdep violation [1] involving af_unix\nsupport of SO_PEEK_OFF.\nSince SO_PEEK_OFF is inherently not thread safe (it uses a per-socket\nsk_peek_off field), there is really no point to enforce a pointless\nthread safety in the kernel.\nAfter this patch :\n- setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF) no longer acquires the socket lock.\n- skb_consume_udp() no longer has to acquire the socket lock.\n- af_unix no longer needs a special version of sk_set_peek_off(),\nbecause it does not lock u->iolock anymore.\nAs a followup, we could replace prot->set_peek_off to be a boolean\nand avoid an indirect call, since we always use sk_set_peek_off().\n[1]\nWARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected\n6.8.0-rc4-syzkaller-00267-g0f1dd5e91e2b #0 Not tainted\nsyz-executor.2/30025 is trying to acquire lock:\nffff8880765e7d80 (&u->iolock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: unix_set_peek_off+0x26/0xa0 net/unix/af_unix.c:789\nbut task is already holding lock:\nffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline]\nffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sockopt_lock_sock net/core/sock.c:1060 [inline]\nffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sk_setsockopt+0xe52/0x3360 net/core/sock.c:1193\nwhich lock already depends on the new lock.\nthe existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:\n-> #1 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}:\nlock_acquire+0x1e3/0x530 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754\nlock_sock_nested+0x48/0x100 net/core/sock.c:3524\nlock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline]\n__unix_dgram_recvmsg+0x1275/0x12c0 net/unix/af_unix.c:2415\nsock_recvmsg_nosec+0x18e/0x1d0 net/socket.c:1046\n____sys_recvmsg+0x3c0/0x470 net/socket.c:2801\n___sys_recvmsg net/socket.c:2845 [inline]\ndo_recvmmsg+0x474/0xae0 net/socket.c:2939\n__sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3018 [inline]\n__do_sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3041 [inline]\n__se_sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3034 [inline]\n__x64_sys_recvmmsg+0x199/0x250 net/socket.c:3034\ndo_syscall_64+0xf9/0x240\nentry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6f/0x77\n-> #0 (&u->iolock){+.+.}-{3:3}:\ncheck_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3134 [inline]\ncheck_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3253 [inline]\nvalidate_chain+0x18ca/0x58e0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3869\n__lock_acquire+0x1345/0x1fd0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5137\nlock_acquire+0x1e3/0x530 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754\n__mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:608 [inline]\n__mutex_lock+0x136/0xd70 kernel/locking/mutex.c:752\nunix_set_peek_off+0x26/0xa0 net/unix/af_unix.c:789\nsk_setsockopt+0x207e/0x3360\ndo_sock_setsockopt+0x2fb/0x720 net/socket.c:2307\n__sys_setsockopt+0x1ad/0x250 net/socket.c:2334\n__do_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2343 [inline]\n__se_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2340 [inline]\n__x64_sys_setsockopt+0xb5/0xd0 net/socket.c:2340\ndo_syscall_64+0xf9/0x240\nentry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6f/0x77\nother info that might help us debug this:\nPossible unsafe locking scenario:\nCPU0 CPU1\n---- ----\nlock(sk_lock-AF_UNIX);\nlock(&u->iolock);\nlock(sk_lock-AF_UNIX);\nlock(&u->iolock);\n*** DEADLOCK ***\n1 lock held by syz-executor.2/30025:\n#0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline]\n#0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sockopt_lock_sock net/core/sock.c:1060 [inline]\n#0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sk_setsockopt+0xe52/0x3360 net/core/sock.c:1193\nstack backtrace:\nCPU: 0 PID: 30025 Comm: syz-executor.2 Not tainted 6.8.0-rc4-syzkaller-00267-g0f1dd5e91e2b #0\nHardware name: Google Google C\n---truncated---", "A vulnerability was found in the Linux kernel related to the handling of the SO_PEEK_OFF socket option, which controls peeking into socket buffers. This option is not thread-safe and may lead to possible race conditions, which could cause system hangs."], "name": "CVE-2024-26732", "package_state": [{"cpe": "cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:6", "fix_state": "Out of support scope", "package_name": "kernel", "product_name": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6"}, {"cpe": "cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:7", "fix_state": "Out of support scope", "package_name": "kernel", "product_name": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7"}, {"cpe": "cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:7", "fix_state": "Out of support scope", "package_name": "kernel-rt", "product_name": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7"}, {"cpe": "cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:8", "fix_state": "Not affected", "package_name": "kernel", "product_name": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8"}, {"cpe": "cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:8", "fix_state": "Not affected", "package_name": "kernel-rt", "product_name": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8"}, {"cpe": "cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:9", "fix_state": "Not affected", "package_name": "kernel", "product_name": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9"}, {"cpe": "cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:9", "fix_state": "Not affected", "package_name": "kernel-rt", "product_name": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9"}], "public_date": "2024-04-03T00:00:00Z", "references": ["https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-26732\nhttps://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-26732\nhttps://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/2024040358-CVE-2024-26732-8cda@gregkh/T"], "statement": "Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 and 9 are not affected by this vulnerability.", "threat_severity": "Moderate", "upstream_fix": "kernel 6.7.7, kernel 6.8"}