CVE-2021-47608

bpf: Fix kernel address leakage in atomic fetch

MEDIUM
5.5
CVSS Score
Published: June 19, 2024 at 02:54 PM UTC
Updated: June 17, 2026 at 04:18 AM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorLinux Kernel

Using Linux by Linux?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect Linux - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
MEDIUM5.5
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.2%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Fix kernel address leakage in atomic fetch The change in commit 37086bfdc737 ("bpf: Propagate stack bounds to registers in atomics w/ BPF_FETCH") around check_mem_access() handling is buggy since this would allow for unprivileged users to leak kernel pointers. For example, an atomic fetch/and with -1 on a stack destination which holds a spilled pointer will migrate the spilled register type into a scalar, which can then be exported out of the program (since scalar != pointer) by dumping it into a map value. The original implementation of XADD was preventing this situation by using a double call to check_mem_access() one with BPF_READ and a subsequent one with BPF_WRITE, in both cases passing -1 as a placeholder value instead of register as per XADD semantics since it didn't contain a value fetch. The BPF_READ also included a check in check_stack_read_fixed_off() which rejects the program if the stack slot is of __is_pointer_value() if dst_regno < 0. The latter is to distinguish whether we're dealing with a regular stack spill/ fill or some arithmetical operation which is disallowed on non-scalars, see also 6e7e63cbb023 ("bpf: Forbid XADD on spilled pointers for unprivileged users") for more context on check_mem_access() and its handling of placeholder value -1. One minimally intrusive option to fix the leak is for the BPF_FETCH case to initially check the BPF_READ case via check_mem_access() with -1 as register, followed by the actual load case with non-negative load_reg to propagate stack bounds to registers.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

5.12 ≤ v < 5.15.115.12 ≤ v < 5.1637086bfdc737ea6f66bf68dcf16757004d68e1e15.16 rc15.16 rc25.16 rc35.16 rc45.16 rc5
Vendor states this is fixed in 423628125a484538111c2c6d9bb1588eb086053b (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7d3baf0afa3aa9102d6a521a8e4c41888bb79882 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.12 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.15.11 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.16 (unaffected)

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet. What the record does show:

References (2)

Patch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/423628125a484538111c2c6d9bb1588eb086053b
Patch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/7d3baf0afa3aa9102d6a521a8e4c41888bb79882

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitNot automatablePartial impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

Attack Vector
LOCAL
Complexity
LOW
Privileges
LOW
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
HIGH
Integrity
NONE
Availability
NONE
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusMODIFIED
CWE
NVD-CWE-noinfo

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card