CVE-2023-53121
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tcp: tcp_make_synack() can be called from process context tcp_rtx_synack() now could be called in process context as explained in 0a375c822497 ("tcp: tcp_rtx_synack() can be called from process context"). tcp_rtx_synack() might call tcp_make_synack(), which will touch per-CPU variables with preemption enabled. This causes the following BUG: BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [00000000] code: ThriftIO1/5464 caller is tcp_make_synack+0x841/0xac0 Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x10d/0x1a0 check_preemption_disabled+0x104/0x110 tcp_make_synack+0x841/0xac0 tcp_v6_send_synack+0x5c/0x450 tcp_rtx_synack+0xeb/0x1f0 inet_rtx_syn_ack+0x34/0x60 tcp_check_req+0x3af/0x9e0 tcp_rcv_state_process+0x59b/0x2030 tcp_v6_do_rcv+0x5f5/0x700 release_sock+0x3a/0xf0 tcp_sendmsg+0x33/0x40 ____sys_sendmsg+0x2f2/0x490 __sys_sendmsg+0x184/0x230 do_syscall_64+0x3d/0x90 Avoid calling __TCP_INC_STATS() with will touch per-cpu variables. Use TCP_INC_STATS() which is safe to be called from context switch.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 3.7, < 4.14.311>= 4.15, < 4.19.279>= 4.20, < 5.4.238>= 5.5, < 5.10.176>= 5.11, < 5.15.104>= 5.16, < 6.1.21>= 6.2, < 6.2.8= 6.3CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped4.14.3114.19.2795.4.238
Upgrade to kernel 4.14.311+ (for 4.14 branch), 4.19.279+ (for 4.19 branch), 5.4.238+ (for 5.4 branch), or 5.10.176+ (for 5.10 branch)
- Identify the current kernel version using `uname -r`
- Determine which version branch your kernel is on (e.g., 4.14.x, 4.19.x, 5.4.x, or 5.10.x)
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to a version >= 4.14.311, 4.19.279, 5.4.238, or 5.10.176 depending on your branch
- Reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version and reviewing the commit 442aa78ed70188b21ccd8669738448702c0a3281 is included
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-53121 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-53121 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data