CVE-2022-49605 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2022-49605
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress
Analysis In Progress

Attack Complexity Details

  • Attack Complexity:
    Attack Complexity Analysis In Progress
  • Attack Vector:
    Attack Vector Under Analysis
  • Privileges Required: None
    No authentication is required for exploitation.
  • Scope:
    Impact is confined to the initially vulnerable component.
  • User Interaction: None
    No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2022-49605 Details

Status: Received on 26 Feb 2025, 07:01 UTC

Published on: 26 Feb 2025, 07:01 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2022-49605 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2022-49605: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: igc: Reinstate IGC_REMOVED logic and implement it properly The initially merged version of the igc driver code (via commit 146740f9abc4, "igc: Add support for PF") contained the following IGC_REMOVED checks in the igc_rd32/wr32() MMIO accessors: u32 igc_rd32(struct igc_hw *hw, u32 reg) { u8 __iomem *hw_addr = READ_ONCE(hw->hw_addr); u32 value = 0; if (IGC_REMOVED(hw_addr)) return ~value; value = readl(&hw_addr[reg]); /* reads should not return all F's */ if (!(~value) && (!reg || !(~readl(hw_addr)))) hw->hw_addr = NULL; return value; } And: #define wr32(reg, val) \ do { \ u8 __iomem *hw_addr = READ_ONCE((hw)->hw_addr); \ if (!IGC_REMOVED(hw_addr)) \ writel((val), &hw_addr[(reg)]); \ } while (0) E.g. igb has similar checks in its MMIO accessors, and has a similar macro E1000_REMOVED, which is implemented as follows: #define E1000_REMOVED(h) unlikely(!(h)) These checks serve to detect and take note of an 0xffffffff MMIO read return from the device, which can be caused by a PCIe link flap or some other kind of PCI bus error, and to avoid performing MMIO reads and writes from that point onwards. However, the IGC_REMOVED macro was not originally implemented: #ifndef IGC_REMOVED #define IGC_REMOVED(a) (0) #endif /* IGC_REMOVED */ This led to the IGC_REMOVED logic to be removed entirely in a subsequent commit (commit 3c215fb18e70, "igc: remove IGC_REMOVED function"), with the rationale that such checks matter only for virtualization and that igc does not support virtualization -- but a PCIe device can become detached even without virtualization being in use, and without proper checks, a PCIe bus error affecting an igc adapter will lead to various NULL pointer dereferences, as the first access after the error will set hw->hw_addr to NULL, and subsequent accesses will blindly dereference this now-NULL pointer. This patch reinstates the IGC_REMOVED checks in igc_rd32/wr32(), and implements IGC_REMOVED the way it is done for igb, by checking for the unlikely() case of hw_addr being NULL. This change prevents the oopses seen when a PCIe link flap occurs on an igc adapter.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2022-49605

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2022-49605 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2022-49605

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2022-49605.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2022-49605, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2022-49605, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2022-49605 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2022-49605 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2022-49605 does not affect system availability.

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

The EPSS score estimates the probability that this vulnerability will be exploited in the near future.

EPSS Score: 0.045% (probability of exploit)

EPSS Percentile: 18.4% (lower percentile = lower relative risk)
This vulnerability is less risky than approximately 81.6% of others.

CVE-2022-49605 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2022-49605: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

  • CVE-2025-3799 – A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, was found in WCMS 11. Affected is an unknown function of the file app/controllers/AnonymousContr...
  • CVE-2025-3798 – A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in WCMS 11. This issue affects the function sub of the file app/admin/AdvadminCon...
  • CVE-2025-3661 – The SB Chart block plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the ‘className’ parameter in all versions up to, and inclu...
  • CVE-2025-3404 – The Download Manager plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary file deletion due to insufficient file path validation in the savePackage func...
  • CVE-2021-4455 – The Wordpress Plugin Smart Product Review plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary file uploads due to missing file type validation in all v...