Answer in brief
CVE-2024-53124 records a Medium severity (CVSS 4.7) security vulnerability in CVE-2024-53124. The source record does not mark it as known exploited. No package mapping is present, so exposure must be confirmed against the affected product and deployment inventory.
Review the upstream advisory, identify the affected product in your inventory, and apply the vendor update when one is available.
Vulnerability describes the vulnerability class recorded for this advisory. The current record does not mark CVE-2024-53124 as known exploited; continue to monitor the source for status changes. This is a product-level record in the current feed, not a package-level dependency mapping.
Affected software not mapped. Review the upstream record for vendor-specific product and version guidance.
Answer in brief
CVE-2024-53124 records a Medium severity (CVSS 4.7) security vulnerability in CVE-2024-53124. The source record does not mark it as known exploited. No package mapping is present, so exposure must be confirmed against the affected product and deployment inventory.
Review the upstream advisory, identify the affected product in your inventory, and apply the vendor update when one is available.
Vulnerability describes the vulnerability class recorded for this advisory. The current record does not mark CVE-2024-53124 as known exploited; continue to monitor the source for status changes. This is a product-level record in the current feed, not a package-level dependency mapping.
Affected software not mapped. Review the upstream record for vendor-specific product and version guidance.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: fix data-races around sk->sk_forward_alloc Syzkaller reported this warning: ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 16 at net/ipv4/af_inet.c:156 inet_sock_destruct+0x1c5/0x1e0 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 16 Comm: ksoftirqd/0 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc5 #26 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:inet_sock_destruct+0x1c5/0x1e0 Code: 24 12 4c 89 e2 5b 48 c7 c7 98 ec bb 82 41 5c e9 d1 18 17 ff 4c 89 e6 5b 48 c7 c7 d0 ec bb 82 41 5c e9 bf 18 17 ff 0f 0b eb 83 <0f> 0b eb 97 0f 0b eb 87 0f 0b e9 68 ff ff ff 66 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 RSP: 0018:ffffc9000008bd90 EFLAGS: 00010206 RAX: 0000000000000300 RBX: ffff88810b172a90 RCX: 0000000000000007 RDX: 0000000000000002 RSI: 0000000000000300 RDI: ffff88810b172a00 RBP: ffff88810b172a00 R08: ffff888104273c00 R09: 0000000000100007 R10: 0000000000020000 R11: 0000000000000006 R12: ffff88810b172a00 R13: 0000000000000004 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: ffff888237c31f78 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff888237c00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007ffc63fecac8 CR3: 000000000342e000 CR4: 00000000000006f0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 Call Trace: <TASK> ? __warn+0x88/0x130 ? inet_sock_destruct+0x1c5/0x1e0 ? report_bug+0x18e/0x1a0 ? handle_bug+0x53/0x90 ? exc_invalid_op+0x18/0x70 ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20 ? inet_sock_destruct+0x1c5/0x1e0 __sk_destruct+0x2a/0x200 rcu_do_batch+0x1aa/0x530 ? rcu_do_batch+0x13b/0x530 rcu_core+0x159/0x2f0 handle_softirqs+0xd3/0x2b0 ? __pfx_smpboot_thread_fn+0x10/0x10 run_ksoftirqd+0x25/0x30 smpboot_thread_fn+0xdd/0x1d0 kthread+0xd3/0x100 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x34/0x50 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK> ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- Its possible that two threads call tcp_v6_do_rcv()/sk_forward_alloc_add() concurrently when sk->sk_state == TCP_LISTEN with sk->sk_lock unlocked, which triggers a data-race around sk->sk_forward_alloc: tcp_v6_rcv tcp_v6_do_rcv skb_clone_and_charge_r sk_rmem_schedule __sk_mem_schedule sk_forward_alloc_add() skb_set_owner_r sk_mem_charge sk_forward_alloc_add() __kfree_skb skb_release_all skb_release_head_state sock_rfree sk_mem_uncharge sk_forward_alloc_add() sk_mem_reclaim // set local var reclaimable __sk_mem_reclaim sk_forward_alloc_add() In this syzkaller testcase, two threads call tcp_v6_do_rcv() with skb->truesize=768, the sk_forward_alloc changes like this: (cpu 1) | (cpu 2) | sk_forward_alloc ... | ... | 0 __sk_mem_schedule() | | +4096 = 4096 | __sk_mem_schedule() | +4096 = 8192 sk_mem_charge() | | -768 = 7424 | sk_mem_charge() | -768 = 6656 ... | ... | sk_mem_uncharge() | | +768 = 7424 reclaimable=7424 | | | sk_mem_uncharge() | +768 = 8192 | reclaimable=8192 | __sk_mem_reclaim() | | -4096 = 4096 | __sk_mem_reclaim() | -8192 = -4096 != 0 The skb_clone_and_charge_r() should not be called in tcp_v6_do_rcv() when sk->sk_state is TCP_LISTEN, it happens later in tcp_v6_syn_recv_sock(). Fix the same issue in dccp_v6_do_rcv().
Reported by NVD (nvd).
CVE-2024-53124 records a Medium severity (CVSS 4.7) security vulnerability in CVE-2024-53124. The source record does not mark it as known exploited. No package mapping is present, so exposure must be confirmed against the affected product and deployment inventory.
The source record does not mark it as known exploited.
Confirm whether the product or interface named by this advisory exists in your inventory.
HOL Guard can help your team monitor supply-chain activity while the upstream record is clarified.
Explore HOL GuardIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: fix data-races around sk->sk_forward_alloc Syzkaller reported this warning: ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 16 at net/ipv4/af_inet.c:156 inet_sock_destruct+0x1c5/0x1e0 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 16 Comm: ksoftirqd/0 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc5 #26 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:inet_sock_destruct+0x1c5/0x1e0 Code: 24 12 4c 89 e2 5b 48 c7 c7 98 ec bb 82 41 5c e9 d1 18 17 ff 4c 89 e6 5b 48 c7 c7 d0 ec bb 82 41 5c e9 bf 18 17 ff 0f 0b eb 83 <0f> 0b eb 97 0f 0b eb 87 0f 0b e9 68 ff ff ff 66 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 RSP: 0018:ffffc9000008bd90 EFLAGS: 00010206 RAX: 0000000000000300 RBX: ffff88810b172a90 RCX: 0000000000000007 RDX: 0000000000000002 RSI: 0000000000000300 RDI: ffff88810b172a00 RBP: ffff88810b172a00 R08: ffff888104273c00 R09: 0000000000100007 R10: 0000000000020000 R11: 0000000000000006 R12: ffff88810b172a00 R13: 0000000000000004 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: ffff888237c31f78 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff888237c00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007ffc63fecac8 CR3: 000000000342e000 CR4: 00000000000006f0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 Call Trace: <TASK> ? __warn+0x88/0x130 ? inet_sock_destruct+0x1c5/0x1e0 ? report_bug+0x18e/0x1a0 ? handle_bug+0x53/0x90 ? exc_invalid_op+0x18/0x70 ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20 ? inet_sock_destruct+0x1c5/0x1e0 __sk_destruct+0x2a/0x200 rcu_do_batch+0x1aa/0x530 ? rcu_do_batch+0x13b/0x530 rcu_core+0x159/0x2f0 handle_softirqs+0xd3/0x2b0 ? __pfx_smpboot_thread_fn+0x10/0x10 run_ksoftirqd+0x25/0x30 smpboot_thread_fn+0xdd/0x1d0 kthread+0xd3/0x100 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x34/0x50 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK> ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- Its possible that two threads call tcp_v6_do_rcv()/sk_forward_alloc_add() concurrently when sk->sk_state == TCP_LISTEN with sk->sk_lock unlocked, which triggers a data-race around sk->sk_forward_alloc: tcp_v6_rcv tcp_v6_do_rcv skb_clone_and_charge_r sk_rmem_schedule __sk_mem_schedule sk_forward_alloc_add() skb_set_owner_r sk_mem_charge sk_forward_alloc_add() __kfree_skb skb_release_all skb_release_head_state sock_rfree sk_mem_uncharge sk_forward_alloc_add() sk_mem_reclaim // set local var reclaimable __sk_mem_reclaim sk_forward_alloc_add() In this syzkaller testcase, two threads call tcp_v6_do_rcv() with skb->truesize=768, the sk_forward_alloc changes like this: (cpu 1) | (cpu 2) | sk_forward_alloc ... | ... | 0 __sk_mem_schedule() | | +4096 = 4096 | __sk_mem_schedule() | +4096 = 8192 sk_mem_charge() | | -768 = 7424 | sk_mem_charge() | -768 = 6656 ... | ... | sk_mem_uncharge() | | +768 = 7424 reclaimable=7424 | | | sk_mem_uncharge() | +768 = 8192 | reclaimable=8192 | __sk_mem_reclaim() | | -4096 = 4096 | __sk_mem_reclaim() | -8192 = -4096 != 0 The skb_clone_and_charge_r() should not be called in tcp_v6_do_rcv() when sk->sk_state is TCP_LISTEN, it happens later in tcp_v6_syn_recv_sock(). Fix the same issue in dccp_v6_do_rcv().
Reported by NVD (nvd).
CVE-2024-53124 records a Medium severity (CVSS 4.7) security vulnerability in CVE-2024-53124. The source record does not mark it as known exploited. No package mapping is present, so exposure must be confirmed against the affected product and deployment inventory.
The source record does not mark it as known exploited.
Confirm whether the product or interface named by this advisory exists in your inventory.
HOL Guard can help your team monitor supply-chain activity while the upstream record is clarified.
Explore HOL Guard