Bug 2350371 (CVE-2024-58060)

Summary: CVE-2024-58060 kernel: bpf: Reject struct_ops registration that uses module ptr and the module btf_id is missing
Product: [Other] Security Response Reporter: OSIDB Bzimport <bzimport>
Component: vulnerabilityAssignee: Product Security DevOps Team <prodsec-dev>
Status: NEW --- QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: unspecifiedCC: dfreiber, drow, jburrell, vkumar
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: Security
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: ---
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description OSIDB Bzimport 2025-03-06 16:02:10 UTC
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

bpf: Reject struct_ops registration that uses module ptr and the module btf_id is missing

There is a UAF report in the bpf_struct_ops when CONFIG_MODULES=n.
In particular, the report is on tcp_congestion_ops that has
a "struct module *owner" member.

For struct_ops that has a "struct module *owner" member,
it can be extended either by the regular kernel module or
by the bpf_struct_ops. bpf_try_module_get() will be used
to do the refcounting and different refcount is done
based on the owner pointer. When CONFIG_MODULES=n,
the btf_id of the "struct module" is missing:

WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol module

Thus, the bpf_try_module_get() cannot do the correct refcounting.

Not all subsystem's struct_ops requires the "struct module *owner" member.
e.g. the recent sched_ext_ops.

This patch is to disable bpf_struct_ops registration if
the struct_ops has the "struct module *" member and the
"struct module" btf_id is missing. The btf_type_is_fwd() helper
is moved to the btf.h header file for this test.

This has happened since the beginning of bpf_struct_ops which has gone
through many changes. The Fixes tag is set to a recent commit that this
patch can apply cleanly. Considering CONFIG_MODULES=n is not
common and the age of the issue, targeting for bpf-next also.

Comment 1 Mauro Matteo Cascella 2025-03-06 18:07:58 UTC
Upstream advisory:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/2025030608-CVE-2024-58060-e849@gregkh/T