CVE-2024-58085: linux kernel vulnerability

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tomoyo: don't emit warning in tomoyo_write_control() syzbot is reporting too large allocation warning at tomoyo_write_control(), for one can write a very very long line without new line character. To fix this warning, I use __GFP_NOWARN rather than checking for KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE, for practically a valid line should be always shorter than 32KB where the "too small to fail" memory-allocation rule applies. One might try to write a valid line that is longer than 32KB, but such request will likely fail with -ENOMEM. Therefore, I feel that separately returning -EINVAL when a line is longer than KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE is redundant. There is no need to distinguish over-32KB and over-KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE.
CVE-2024-58085CVSS 5.5Linux

CVE-2024-58085: linux kernel vulnerability

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tomoyo: don't emit warning in tomoyo_write_control() syzbot is reporting too large allocation warning at tomoyo_write_control(), for one can write a very very long line without new line character. To fix this warning, I use __GFP_NOWARN rather than checking for KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE, for practically a valid line should be always shorter than 32KB where the "too small to fail" memory-allocation rule applies. One might try to write a valid line that is longer than 32KB, but such request will likely fail with -ENOMEM. Therefore, I feel that separately returning -EINVAL when a line is longer than KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE is redundant. There is no need to distinguish over-32KB and over-KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE.

CVSS
5.5 MEDIUM
EPSS
7.34%
Known exploited
not in KEV
Product
linux kernel

What is known

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tomoyo: don't emit warning in tomoyo_write_control() syzbot is reporting too large allocation warning at tomoyo_write_control(), for one can write a very very long line without new line character. To fix this warning, I use __GFP_NOWARN rather than checking for KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE, for practically a valid line should be always shorter than 32KB where the "too small to fail" memory-allocation rule applies. One might try to write a valid line that is longer than 32KB, but such request will likely fail with -ENOMEM. Therefore, I feel that separately returning -EINVAL when a line is longer than KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE is redundant. There is no need to distinguish over-32KB and over-KMALLOC_MAX_SIZE.

Sources

Security newsletter

Get new CVE alerts before they become an incident

We send selected infrastructure threats in English, with practical notes for DataHouse environments.

  • DataHouse: server administration and secure cloud
  • Hostilla.pl: hosting and mail services
  • SecDNS.pl: free DNS security layer