Описание
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
serial: protect uart_port_dtr_rts() in uart_shutdown() too
Commit af224ca2df29 (serial: core: Prevent unsafe uart port access, part 3) added few uport == NULL checks. It added one to uart_shutdown(), so the commit assumes, uport can be NULL in there. But right after that protection, there is an unprotected "uart_port_dtr_rts(uport, false);" call. That is invoked only if HUPCL is set, so I assume that is the reason why we do not see lots of these reports.
Or it cannot be NULL at this point at all for some reason :P.
Until the above is investigated, stay on the safe side and move this dereference to the if too.
I got this inconsistency from Coverity under CID 1585130. Thanks.
Ссылки
- Patch
- Patch
- Patch
Уязвимые конфигурации
Одно из
EPSS
5.5 Medium
CVSS3
Дефекты
Связанные уязвимости
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: serial: protect uart_port_dtr_rts() in uart_shutdown() too Commit af224ca2df29 (serial: core: Prevent unsafe uart port access, part 3) added few uport == NULL checks. It added one to uart_shutdown(), so the commit assumes, uport can be NULL in there. But right after that protection, there is an unprotected "uart_port_dtr_rts(uport, false);" call. That is invoked only if HUPCL is set, so I assume that is the reason why we do not see lots of these reports. Or it cannot be NULL at this point at all for some reason :P. Until the above is investigated, stay on the safe side and move this dereference to the if too. I got this inconsistency from Coverity under CID 1585130. Thanks.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: serial: protect uart_port_dtr_rts() in uart_shutdown() too Commit af224ca2df29 (serial: core: Prevent unsafe uart port access, part 3) added few uport == NULL checks. It added one to uart_shutdown(), so the commit assumes, uport can be NULL in there. But right after that protection, there is an unprotected "uart_port_dtr_rts(uport, false);" call. That is invoked only if HUPCL is set, so I assume that is the reason why we do not see lots of these reports. Or it cannot be NULL at this point at all for some reason :P. Until the above is investigated, stay on the safe side and move this dereference to the if too. I got this inconsistency from Coverity under CID 1585130. Thanks.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: s ...
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: serial: protect uart_port_dtr_rts() in uart_shutdown() too Commit af224ca2df29 (serial: core: Prevent unsafe uart port access, part 3) added few uport == NULL checks. It added one to uart_shutdown(), so the commit assumes, uport can be NULL in there. But right after that protection, there is an unprotected "uart_port_dtr_rts(uport, false);" call. That is invoked only if HUPCL is set, so I assume that is the reason why we do not see lots of these reports. Or it cannot be NULL at this point at all for some reason :P. Until the above is investigated, stay on the safe side and move this dereference to the if too. I got this inconsistency from Coverity under CID 1585130. Thanks.
EPSS
5.5 Medium
CVSS3