ghsa-5qqg-7vmr-gjg2
Vulnerability from github
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
netfs: Fix missing xas_retry() calls in xarray iteration
netfslib has a number of places in which it performs iteration of an xarray whilst being under the RCU read lock. It should call xas_retry() as the first thing inside of the loop and do "continue" if it returns true in case the xarray walker passed out a special value indicating that the walk needs to be redone from the root[*].
Fix this by adding the missing retry checks.
[*] I wonder if this should be done inside xas_find(), xas_next_node() and suchlike, but I'm told that's not an simple change to effect.
This can cause an oops like that below. Note the faulting address - this is an internal value (|0x2) returned from xarray.
BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000402 ... RIP: 0010:netfs_rreq_unlock+0xef/0x380 [netfs] ... Call Trace: netfs_rreq_assess+0xa6/0x240 [netfs] netfs_readpage+0x173/0x3b0 [netfs] ? init_wait_var_entry+0x50/0x50 filemap_read_page+0x33/0xf0 filemap_get_pages+0x2f2/0x3f0 filemap_read+0xaa/0x320 ? do_filp_open+0xb2/0x150 ? rmqueue+0x3be/0xe10 ceph_read_iter+0x1fe/0x680 [ceph] ? new_sync_read+0x115/0x1a0 new_sync_read+0x115/0x1a0 vfs_read+0xf3/0x180 ksys_read+0x5f/0xe0 do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
Changes:
ver #2) - Changed an unsigned int to a size_t to reduce the likelihood of an overflow as per Willy's suggestion. - Added an additional patch to fix the maths.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-49810"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-05-01T15:16:04Z",
"severity": null
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nnetfs: Fix missing xas_retry() calls in xarray iteration\n\nnetfslib has a number of places in which it performs iteration of an xarray\nwhilst being under the RCU read lock. It *should* call xas_retry() as the\nfirst thing inside of the loop and do \"continue\" if it returns true in case\nthe xarray walker passed out a special value indicating that the walk needs\nto be redone from the root[*].\n\nFix this by adding the missing retry checks.\n\n[*] I wonder if this should be done inside xas_find(), xas_next_node() and\n suchlike, but I\u0027m told that\u0027s not an simple change to effect.\n\nThis can cause an oops like that below. Note the faulting address - this\nis an internal value (|0x2) returned from xarray.\n\nBUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000402\n...\nRIP: 0010:netfs_rreq_unlock+0xef/0x380 [netfs]\n...\nCall Trace:\n netfs_rreq_assess+0xa6/0x240 [netfs]\n netfs_readpage+0x173/0x3b0 [netfs]\n ? init_wait_var_entry+0x50/0x50\n filemap_read_page+0x33/0xf0\n filemap_get_pages+0x2f2/0x3f0\n filemap_read+0xaa/0x320\n ? do_filp_open+0xb2/0x150\n ? rmqueue+0x3be/0xe10\n ceph_read_iter+0x1fe/0x680 [ceph]\n ? new_sync_read+0x115/0x1a0\n new_sync_read+0x115/0x1a0\n vfs_read+0xf3/0x180\n ksys_read+0x5f/0xe0\n do_syscall_64+0x38/0x90\n entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae\n\nChanges:\n========\nver #2)\n - Changed an unsigned int to a size_t to reduce the likelihood of an\n overflow as per Willy\u0027s suggestion.\n - Added an additional patch to fix the maths.",
"id": "GHSA-5qqg-7vmr-gjg2",
"modified": "2025-05-01T15:31:48Z",
"published": "2025-05-01T15:31:48Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-49810"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/7e043a80b5dae5c2d2cf84031501de7827fd6c00"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/b2cc07a76f1eb12de3b22caf5fdbf856a7bef16d"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.