Executive Summary
| Informations | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Name | CVE-2022-49073 | First vendor Publication | 2025-02-26 |
| Vendor | Cve | Last vendor Modification | 2025-02-26 |
Security-Database Scoring CVSS v3
| Cvss vector : N/A | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall CVSS Score | NA | ||
| Base Score | NA | Environmental Score | NA |
| impact SubScore | NA | Temporal Score | NA |
| Exploitabality Sub Score | NA | ||
| Calculate full CVSS 3.0 Vectors scores | |||
Security-Database Scoring CVSS v2
| Cvss vector : | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Cvss Base Score | N/A | Attack Range | N/A |
| Cvss Impact Score | N/A | Attack Complexity | N/A |
| Cvss Expoit Score | N/A | Authentication | N/A |
| Calculate full CVSS 2.0 Vectors scores | |||
Detail
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ata: sata_dwc_460ex: Fix crash due to OOB write the driver uses libata's "tag" values from in various arrays. Since the mentioned patch bumped the ATA_TAG_INTERNAL to 32, the value of the SATA_DWC_QCMD_MAX needs to account for that. Otherwise ATA_TAG_INTERNAL usage cause similar crashes like this as reported by Tice Rex on the OpenWrt Forum and reproduced (with symbols) here: | BUG: Kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0x00000000 | Faulting instruction address: 0xc03ed4b8 | Oops: Kernel access of bad area, sig: 11 [#1] | BE PAGE_SIZE=4K PowerPC 44x Platform | CPU: 0 PID: 362 Comm: scsi_eh_1 Not tainted 5.4.163 #0 | NIP: c03ed4b8 LR: c03d27e8 CTR: c03ed36c | REGS: cfa59950 TRAP: 0300 Not tainted (5.4.163) | MSR: 00021000 This is because sata_dwc_dma_xfer_complete() NULLs the dma_pending's next neighbour "chan" (a *dma_chan struct) in this '32' case right here (line ~735): > hsdevp->dma_pending[tag] = SATA_DWC_DMA_PENDING_NONE; Then the next time, a dma gets issued; dma_dwc_xfer_setup() passes the NULL'd hsdevp->chan to the dmaengine_slave_config() which then causes the crash. With this patch, SATA_DWC_QCMD_MAX is now set to ATA_MAX_QUEUE + 1. This avoids the OOB. But please note, there was a worthwhile discussion on what ATA_TAG_INTERNAL and ATA_MAX_QUEUE is. And why there should not be a "fake" 33 command-long queue size. Ideally, the dw driver should account for the ATA_TAG_INTERNAL. In Damien Le Moal's words: "... having looked at the driver, it is a bigger change than just faking a 33rd "tag" that is in fact not a command tag at all." BugLink: https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/issues/9505 |
Original Source
| Url : http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2022-49073 |
Sources (Detail)
Alert History
| Date | Informations |
|---|---|
| 2025-02-26 17:20:34 |
|
