Vulnerability · Published May 1, 2025 · Assigned by Linux
CVE-2022-49808net: dsa: don't leak tagger-owned storage on switch driver unbind
Medium 5.5
In plain English
A medium-severity security flaw in Linux from Linux. There are no confirmed reports of exploitation so far. The chance it is exploited in the next 30 days is estimated at 0.2% (higher than 6% of all known vulnerabilities). Fixed versions are available - upgrade the affected package.
Official description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: dsa: don't leak tagger-owned storage on switch driver unbind In the initial commit dc452a471dba ("net: dsa: introduce tagger-owned storage for private and shared data"), we had a call to tag_ops->disconnect(dst) issued from dsa_tree_free(), which is called at tree teardown time. There were problems with connecting to a switch tree as a whole, so this got reworked to connecting to individual switches within the tree. In this process, tag_ops->disconnect(ds) was made to be called only from switch.c (cross-chip notifiers emitted as a result of dynamic tag proto changes), but the normal driver teardown code path wasn't replaced with anything. Solve this problem by adding a function that does the opposite of dsa_switch_setup_tag_protocol(), which is called from the equivalent spot in dsa_switch_teardown(). The positioning here also ensures that we won't have any use-after-free in tagging protocol (*rcv) ops, since the teardown sequence is as follows: dsa_tree_teardown -> dsa_tree_teardown_master -> dsa_master_teardown -> unsets master->dsa_ptr, making no further packets match the ETH_P_XDSA packet type handler -> dsa_tree_teardown_ports -> dsa_port_teardown -> dsa_slave_destroy -> unregisters DSA net devices, there is even a synchronize_net() in unregister_netdevice_many() -> dsa_tree_teardown_switches -> dsa_switch_teardown -> dsa_switch_teardown_tag_protocol -> finally frees the tagger-owned storage
Affected packages & fixed versions
| Ecosystem | Package | Fixed in | Advisory |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian:12 | linux | 6.0.10-1 | DEBIAN-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Debian:13 | linux | 6.0.10-1 | DEBIAN-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Debian:14 | linux | 6.0.10-1 | DEBIAN-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-allwinner-5.19 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-aws-5.19 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-aws-6.2 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-aws-6.5 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-azure-5.19 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-azure-6.2 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-azure-6.5 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-azure-fde-5.19 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-azure-fde-6.2 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-gcp-5.19 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-gcp-6.2 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-gcp-6.5 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-hwe-5.19 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-hwe-6.2 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-hwe-6.5 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-intel-iot-realtime | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-lowlatency-hwe-5.19 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-lowlatency-hwe-6.2 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-lowlatency-hwe-6.5 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-nvidia-6.2 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-nvidia-6.5 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-oem-5.17 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-oem-6.0 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-oem-6.1 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-oem-6.5 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-oracle-6.5 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:24.04:LTS | linux-raspi-realtime | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-realtime | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:24.04:LTS | linux-realtime | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-riscv | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-riscv-5.19 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-riscv-6.5 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-starfive-5.19 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-starfive-6.2 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |
| Ubuntu:22.04:LTS | linux-starfive-6.5 | no fix listed | UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49808 |