Bug 2350371 (CVE-2024-58060) - CVE-2024-58060 kernel: bpf: Reject struct_ops registration that uses module ptr and the module btf_id is missing
Summary: CVE-2024-58060 kernel: bpf: Reject struct_ops registration that uses module p...
Keywords:
Status: NEW
Alias: CVE-2024-58060
Product: Security Response
Classification: Other
Component: vulnerability
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Product Security DevOps Team
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-03-06 16:02 UTC by OSIDB Bzimport
Modified: 2025-03-26 15:14 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

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


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.