| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
sctp: avoid auth_enable sysctl UAF during netns teardown
proc_sctp_do_auth() updates the SCTP control socket after changing
net.sctp.auth_enable. The handler gets the per-net SCTP state from
ctl->data, so an already opened sysctl file can still target a network
namespace while that namespace is being torn down.
SCTP previously registered its per-net sysctls from sctp_defaults_init(),
while the control socket is created later from sctp_ctrlsock_init(). This
exposed a window during initialization where auth_enable was writable
before net->sctp.ctl_sock existed, and a teardown window where auth_enable
stayed writable after inet_ctl_sock_destroy() had released the control
socket.
Move the per-net SCTP sysctl registration into sctp_ctrlsock_init() after
sctp_ctl_sock_init() succeeds, and unregister the sysctl table before
destroying the control socket in sctp_ctrlsock_exit(). If sysctl
registration fails after the control socket was created, destroy the
control socket in the same init path.
Make sctp_sysctl_net_unregister() tolerate a missing header and clear the
saved pointer so init-error and exit paths can safely share the unregister
helper. |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
audit: fix recursive locking deadlock in audit_dupe_exe()
A deadlock occurs in the audit subsystem when duplicating
executable-related rules.
When a file is moved (e.g., via do_renameat2()), the VFS layer locks
the parent directory (I_MUTEX_PARENT), which synchronously triggers an
fsnotify_move event. If an existing executable audit rule matches the
file being moved, the audit subsystem catches this event and calls
audit_dupe_exe() to duplicate the watch and update the rule. Then,
audit_alloc_mark() would call kern_path_parent() to resolve the path,
leading to a blind attempt to acquire the exact same I_MUTEX_PARENT lock
already held by the task, resulting in the following recursive locking
deadlock:
============================================
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
6.12.0-55.27.1.el10_0.x86_64+debug #1 Not tainted
--------------------------------------------
mv/5099 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff888132845358 (&inode->i_sb->s_type->i_mutex_dir_key/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: __kern_path_locked+0x10a/0x2f0
but task is already holding lock:
ffff888132846b58 (&inode->i_sb->s_type->i_mutex_dir_key/1){+.+.}-{3:3},
at: lock_two_directories+0x13f/0x2b0
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(&inode->i_sb->s_type->i_mutex_dir_key/1);
lock(&inode->i_sb->s_type->i_mutex_dir_key/1);
*** DEADLOCK ***
May be due to missing lock nesting notation
6 locks held by mv/5099:
#0: ffff888112a9c440 (sb_writers#13)
at: do_renameat2+0x34c/0xbc0
#1: ffff888112a9c790 (&type->s_vfs_rename_key#3)
at: do_renameat2+0x415/0xbc0
#2: ffff888132846b58 (&inode->i_sb->s_type->i_mutex_dir_key/1)
at: lock_two_directories+0x13f/0x2b0
#3: ffff888132845358 (&inode->i_sb->s_type->i_mutex_dir_key/5)
at: lock_two_directories+0x175/0x2b0
#4: ffffffffb3a1fb10 (&fsnotify_mark_srcu)
at: fsnotify+0x454/0x28a0
#5: ffffffffaf886230 (audit_filter_mutex)
at: audit_update_watch+0x36/0x11e0
stack backtrace:
Call Trace:
<TASK>
dump_stack_lvl+0x6f/0xb0
print_deadlock_bug.cold+0xbd/0xca
validate_chain+0x83a/0xf00
__lock_acquire+0xcac/0x1d20
lock_acquire.part.0+0x11b/0x360
down_write_nested+0x9f/0x230
__kern_path_locked+0x10a/0x2f0
kern_path_locked+0x26/0x40
audit_alloc_mark+0xfb/0x4f0
audit_dupe_exe+0x6c/0xe0
audit_dupe_rule+0x6c2/0xc00
audit_update_watch+0x4cc/0x11e0
audit_watch_handle_event+0x12c/0x1b0
send_to_group+0x5d0/0x8b0
fsnotify+0x615/0x28a0
fsnotify_move+0x1d8/0x630
vfs_rename+0xdcd/0x1df0
do_renameat2+0x9d4/0xbc0
__x64_sys_renameat+0x192/0x260
do_syscall_64+0x92/0x180
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
RIP: 0033:0x7f0491fe8c4e
Code: 0f 1f 40 00 48 8b 15 c1 e1 16 00 f7 d8 64 89 02 b8 ff ff ff ff
c3 66 0f 1f 44 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa 49 89 ca b8 08 01 00 00 0f 05 <48>
3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 0a c3 66 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 48 8b 15 89
RSP: 002b:00007ffc7210bf38 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000108
RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007f0491fe8c4e
RDX: 0000000000000003 RSI: 00007ffc7210e6c8 RDI: 00000000ffffff9c
RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000001
R10: 00005575eb2dae2a R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00005575eb2dae2a
R13: 00007ffc7210e6c8 R14: 0000000000000003 R15: 00000000ffffff9c
</TASK>
The aforementioned deadlock can be consistently reproduced by running
the script below:
audit-dupe-exe-deadlock.sh
--------------------------
#!/bin/bash
auditctl -D
mkdir -p /tmp/foo
touch /tmp/file
auditctl -a always,exit -F exe=/tmp/file -F path=/tmp/file -S all -k dr
mv /tmp/file /tmp/foo/file
rm -Rf /tmp/foo
This patch fixes the issue by introducing struct audit_watch_ctx to pass
the fsnotify event context down to audit_alloc_mark(). By utilizing the
already-resolved directory inode provided by the event, we bypass the
kern_path_parent() path resol
---truncated--- |
| Subscriber Broken Access Control in Tourfic <= 2.23.1 versions. |
| Incorrect Authorization (CWE-863) in Kibana can lead to unauthorized deletion of Synthetics private locations via Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (CAPEC-1). Synthetics private locations can be shared with more than one space, and deleting one removes it from every space it is shared with. The safeguard that prevented the deletion of a private location still in use evaluated only the monitors visible in the requesting user's own space, so monitors that depend on the private location in other spaces were not taken into account. As a result, an authenticated Kibana user holding the Synthetics write privilege in a single space could delete a private location that other spaces still depend on, even where the user has no access to those spaces. Deleting the private location removes the shared configuration and stops the monitors in the other spaces from running, which suppresses the availability monitoring those spaces rely on. |
| Kibana Agent Builder does not correctly verify that the requesting user holds the privileges required by a separate Kibana feature before it creates and runs a tool that invokes that feature's functionality. This allows privilege escalation and could lead to disclosure of sensitive information that the user is not authorized to read. |
| Unauthenticated Broken Access Control in Hydra Booking <= 1.2.2 versions. |
| Unauthenticated Broken Access Control in Anti Spam and list cleaner – AcyChecker <= 2.0.0 versions. |
| Missing Authorization (CWE-862) in Kibana can lead to cross-space information disclosure and unauthorized data modification via Privilege Abuse (CAPEC-122). Kibana Machine Learning carries out its Elasticsearch operations with elevated internal permissions and relies on a per-request space filter to keep the machine learning data of one space separated from another. Part of the Machine Learning functionality did not apply that filter, so operations issued from one space were carried out against the machine learning data of every space in the deployment. |
| The Elastic Security capability that suggests existing field values while a user authors endpoint policy artifacts queries Elastic Defend event data with Kibana's internal Elasticsearch account instead of the account of the requesting user. Only Kibana feature privileges are verified, and the caller's Elasticsearch index privileges are not. An authenticated user who holds Elastic Security feature privileges but no read access to the Elastic Defend event indices can therefore retrieve field values from that data, including process command line arguments, which commonly contain tokens, credentials, connection strings, and other sensitive operational detail from protected hosts. |
| A Kibana Machine Learning capability that removes a saved object from the current space accepts machine learning trained models as a target, but it verifies only the privileges that apply to anomaly detection jobs and data frame analytics jobs. A user whose role grants create anomaly detection jobs and data frame analytics jobs without the trained model privilege can therefore remove a trained model from a space. The model itself is not deleted and remains available in its other spaces, and the change can be reversed by a suitably privileged user. |
| The state that Kibana stores for an Observability Onboarding flow is not bound to the user who created the flow, and the routes that read and update that state do not verify ownership. An authenticated user who holds only generic read access to the space can therefore discover the onboarding flows of other users, read their onboarding state, and write arbitrary progress data into them. A tampered flow can also cause the owner's onboarding view to fail with a server error. |
| Missing Authorization (CWE-862) in Kibana can lead to information disclosure via Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (CAPEC-1). An internal Kibana data retrieval capability used by Elastic Defend endpoint response actions did not enforce the Security Solution and endpoint privileges that its user-facing equivalents require, and it retrieved data with elevated internal permissions rather than the permissions of the requesting user. As a result, an authenticated low-privileged Kibana user with no Security Solution privileges, endpoint privileges and no Elasticsearch privileges on the underlying data, could read endpoint response action records and the corresponding response content returned by managed hosts. |
| Kibana Agent Builder determines whether a caller owns a private agent by comparing a stable user identifier when one is recorded, and falling back to a comparison of the username when it is not. A username is not unique across Elasticsearch authentication realms, so two distinct principals that share a username in different realms are treated as the same owner. This discloses the configuration and instructions of an agent the caller does not own, and allows that agent to be altered or removed. |
| Incorrect Authorization (CWE-863) in Kibana Fleet can lead to privilege escalation via Privilege Abuse (CAPEC-122). Fleet restricts some callers to managing integration policies for one specific integration. When an existing integration policy was updated, that restriction was evaluated against the integration recorded on the stored policy rather than against the replacement integration supplied with the update. An authenticated user holding only the Elastic Defend endpoint policy management privilege was therefore able to convert an endpoint policy they administer into a policy for a different integration, and to supply that integration's configuration at the same time. |
| Missing Authorization (CWE-862) in Kibana can lead to unauthorized execution of Osquery and Elastic Defend response actions on managed hosts via Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (CAPEC-1). A Kibana user who is able to author and evaluate Elastic Security detection rules can cause response actions to be carried out against enrolled agents without holding the Osquery live query privileges or the Elastic Defend response action privileges that normally govern those capabilities. Depending on the response action involved, this can result in disclosure of information from the affected hosts or in unauthorized changes to their state. |
| Open WebUI is an extensible, feature-rich, and user-friendly self-hosted AI platform. From 0.9.5 before 0.10.0, any authenticated user can overwrite the content of a message in a channel they do not belong to (including private and DM channels) by sending a chat completion request with a channel:-prefixed chat_id and a target message_id. The channel: path routes pipeline output through _make_channel_emitter, which writes to the Messages table using the caller-supplied message_id without binding it to the channel. This issue is fixed in version 0.10.0. |
| The native inference process that Elasticsearch uses to evaluate uploaded machine learning models accepts a model operation that computes a memory address from an offset supplied inside the model, without validating that the offset stays within the bounds of the underlying storage. A user with the privileges required to upload and deploy a trained model can craft a model that reads and writes memory outside the intended allocation. The result is heap corruption that crashes the inference process, and, with sufficient control over the heap layout, could allow arbitrary code execution in the context of that process. |
| GNU SASL before 2.2.4 lacks sanitization of a short challenge in _gsasl_ntlm_client_step in the NTLM client, which could result in memory disclosure via a crafted server. |
| vantage6 is an open-source infrastructure for privacy preserving analysis. In version 5.0.2 and earlier, the algorithm-store edit permission lacks an ownership check, allowing one algorithm developer to alter another developer's algorithm while it is pending or under review. The attacker can change metadata including the algorithm image or image tag, causing reviewers and nodes to trust a different image from the one originally submitted for approval. No fixed version is available as of this review. |
| A vulnerability was found in dresende node-sql-query 0.1.25/0.1.26/0.1.27/0.1.28. Affected by this vulnerability is the function SelectQuery.from/SelectQuery.build in the library lib/Select.js of the component Request Parameter Handler. Performing a manipulation results in sql injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. Upgrading to version 0.1.29 addresses this issue. The patch is named 3414c42f6de89826fa1f5f36f6139d1e6552778e. Upgrading the affected component is recommended. |
