CVE-2010-2524

Publication date 8 September 2010

Last updated 24 July 2024

Ubuntu priority

Medium

Why this priority?

Cvss 3 Severity Score

7.8 · High

Score breakdown

The DNS resolution functionality in the CIFS implementation in the Linux kernel before 2.6.35, when CONFIG_CIFS_DFS_UPCALL is enabled, relies on a user's keyring for the dns_resolver upcall in the cifs.upcall userspace helper, which allows local users to spoof the results of DNS queries and perform arbitrary CIFS mounts via vectors involving an add_key call, related to a "cache stuffing" issue and MS-DFS referrals.

From the Ubuntu Security Team

David Howells discovered that DNS resolution in CIFS could be spoofed. A local attacker could exploit this to control DNS replies, leading to a loss of privacy and possible privilege escalation.

Read the notes from the security team

Status

Package Ubuntu Release Status
linux 10.10 maverick
Not affected
10.04 LTS lucid
Fixed 2.6.32-25.43
9.10 karmic
Fixed 2.6.31-22.67
9.04 jaunty Ignored
8.04 LTS hardy
Not affected
6.06 LTS dapper Not in release
linux-ec2 10.10 maverick Ignored end of life
10.04 LTS lucid
Fixed 2.6.32-309.18
9.10 karmic
Fixed 2.6.31-307.21
8.04 LTS hardy Not in release
6.06 LTS dapper Not in release
linux-fsl-imx51 10.10 maverick Not in release
10.04 LTS lucid
Fixed 2.6.31-608.22
9.10 karmic
Fixed 2.6.31-112.30
8.04 LTS hardy Not in release
6.06 LTS dapper Not in release
linux-lts-backport-maverick 10.10 maverick Not in release
10.04 LTS lucid
Fixed 2.6.35-25.44~lucid1
9.10 karmic Not in release
8.04 LTS hardy Not in release
6.06 LTS dapper Not in release
linux-source-2.6.15 10.10 maverick Not in release
10.04 LTS lucid Not in release
9.10 karmic Not in release
9.04 jaunty Not in release
8.04 LTS hardy Not in release
6.06 LTS dapper
Not affected

Notes

sbeattie

according to oss-security discussion, git commit 6103335de8afa5d780dcd512abe85c696af7b040 introduced the problem, so 2.6.25-rc1 onwards.

smb

Jaunty *may* be affected, but the problem is that there is no infra- structure for thread credentials, so even if it is possible to back- port the whole thing it would be completely different and prone to be incorrect. That together with the fact that Jaunty is EOL more or less I don't think we should put in much effort there.

Severity score breakdown

Parameter Value
Base score 7.8 · High
Attack vector Local
Attack complexity Low
Privileges required Low
User interaction None
Scope Unchanged
Confidentiality High
Integrity impact High
Availability impact High
Vector CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

References

Related Ubuntu Security Notices (USN)

    • USN-1074-1
    • Linux kernel vulnerabilities
    • 25 February 2011
    • USN-1083-1
    • Linux kernel vulnerabilities
    • 3 March 2011
    • USN-1000-1
    • Linux kernel vulnerabilities
    • 19 October 2010
    • USN-1074-2
    • Linux kernel vulnerabilities
    • 28 February 2011

Other references