Linux: Out-of-bounds Write
CVE-2024-36001 is a high-severity out-of-bounds write vulnerability in Linux, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.8 out of 10. It can be exploited with local access to the system by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. The record lists versions 5eaf23b2e81349f6614f88396dc468fda89fc0b9, c97f59e276d4e93480f29a70accbd0d7273cf3f5 as the first without the flaw, so updating Linux to one of those releases or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.21% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update Linux to 5eaf23b2e81349f6614f88396dc468fda89fc0b9 or c97f59e276d4e93480f29a70accbd0d7273cf3f5, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
- Update Linux Kernel to 6.8.9 or a later version.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linux | Linux | 41d8e7673a7726cba57cb8112d81c89cfb6c3e35 up to, but not including, 5eaf23b2e81349f6614f88396dc468fda89fc0b9; 41d8e7673a7726cba57cb8112d81c89cfb6c3e35 up to, but not including, c97f59e276d4e93480f29a70accbd0d7273cf3f5; 6.8 | 5eaf23b2e81349f6614f88396dc468fda89fc0b9, c97f59e276d4e93480f29a70accbd0d7273cf3f5 |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | 6.8 up to, but not including, 6.8.9; 6.9 | 6.8.9 |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- LocalThe attacker needs local access or must trick a user into running something.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- LowA basic user account is enough.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by NVD.
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.8 | High | CNA |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.8 | High | NVD |
Official description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfs: Fix the pre-flush when appending to a file in writethrough mode In netfs_perform_write(), when the file is marked NETFS_ICTX_WRITETHROUGH or O_*SYNC or RWF_*SYNC was specified, write-through caching is performed on a buffered file. When setting up for write-through, we flush any conflicting writes in the region and wait for the write to complete, failing if there's a write error to return. The issue arises if we're writing at or above the EOF position because we skip the flush and - more importantly - the wait. This becomes a problem if there's a partial folio at the end of the file that is being written out and we want to make a write to it too. Both the already-running write and the write we start both want to clear the writeback mark, but whoever is second causes a warning looking something like: ------------[ cut here ]------------ R=00000012: folio 11 is not under writeback WARNING: CPU: 34 PID: 654 at fs/netfs/write_collect.c:105 ... CPU: 34 PID: 654 Comm: kworker/u386:27 Tainted: G S ... ... Workqueue: events_unbound netfs_write_collection_worker ... RIP: 0010:netfs_writeback_lookup_folio Fix this by making the flush-and-wait unconditional. It will do nothing if there are no folios in the pagecache and will return quickly if there are no folios in the region specified. Further, move the WBC attachment above the flush call as the flush is going to attach a WBC and detach it again if it is not present - and since we need one anyway we might as well share it.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Out-of-bounds Write
The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer. Be wary that a language's interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega, and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.
- Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking. D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND discusses canary-based detection in detail.
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Patches and release notes
Recent Out-of-bounds Write vulnerabilities
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 7.1 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.