CVE-2024-26991
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: KVM: x86/mmu: x86: Don't overflow lpage_info when checking attributes Fix KVM_SET_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES to not overflow lpage_info array and trigger KASAN splat, as seen in the private_mem_conversions_test selftest. When memory attributes are set on a GFN range, that range will have specific properties applied to the TDP. A huge page cannot be used when the attributes are inconsistent, so they are disabled for those the specific huge pages. For internal KVM reasons, huge pages are also not allowed to span adjacent memslots regardless of whether the backing memory could be mapped as huge. What GFNs support which huge page sizes is tracked by an array of arrays 'lpage_info' on the memslot, of ‘kvm_lpage_info’ structs. Each index of lpage_info contains a vmalloc allocated array of these for a specific supported page size. The kvm_lpage_info denotes whether a specific huge page (GFN and page size) on the memslot is supported. These arrays include indices for unaligned head and tail huge pages. Preventing huge pages from spanning adjacent memslot is covered by incrementing the count in head and tail kvm_lpage_info when the memslot is allocated, but disallowing huge pages for memory that has mixed attributes has to be done in a more complicated way. During the KVM_SET_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES ioctl KVM updates lpage_info for each memslot in the range that has mismatched attributes. KVM does this a memslot at a time, and marks a special bit, KVM_LPAGE_MIXED_FLAG, in the kvm_lpage_info for any huge page. This bit is essentially a permanently elevated count. So huge pages will not be mapped for the GFN at that page size if the count is elevated in either case: a huge head or tail page unaligned to the memslot or if KVM_LPAGE_MIXED_FLAG is set because it has mixed attributes. To determine whether a huge page has consistent attributes, the KVM_SET_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES operation checks an xarray to make sure it consistently has the incoming attribute. Since level - 1 huge pages are aligned to level huge pages, it employs an optimization. As long as the level - 1 huge pages are checked first, it can just check these and assume that if each level - 1 huge page contained within the level sized huge page is not mixed, then the level size huge page is not mixed. This optimization happens in the helper hugepage_has_attrs(). Unfortunately, although the kvm_lpage_info array representing page size 'level' will contain an entry for an unaligned tail page of size level, the array for level - 1 will not contain an entry for each GFN at page size level. The level - 1 array will only contain an index for any unaligned region covered by level - 1 huge page size, which can be a smaller region. So this causes the optimization to overflow the level - 1 kvm_lpage_info and perform a vmalloc out of bounds read. In some cases of head and tail pages where an overflow could happen, callers skip the operation completely as KVM_LPAGE_MIXED_FLAG is not required to prevent huge pages as discussed earlier. But for memslots that are smaller than the 1GB page size, it does call hugepage_has_attrs(). In this case the huge page is both the head and tail page. The issue can be observed simply by compiling the kernel with CONFIG_KASAN_VMALLOC and running the selftest “private_mem_conversions_test”, which produces the output like the following: BUG: KASAN: vmalloc-out-of-bounds in hugepage_has_attrs+0x7e/0x110 Read of size 4 at addr ffffc900000a3008 by task private_mem_con/169 Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl print_report ? __virt_addr_valid ? hugepage_has_attrs ? hugepage_has_attrs kasan_report ? hugepage_has_attrs hugepage_has_attrs kvm_arch_post_set_memory_attributes kvm_vm_ioctl It is a little ambiguous whether the unaligned head page (in the bug case also the tail page) should be expected to have KVM_LPAGE_MIXED_FLAG set. It is not functionally required, as the unal ---truncated---
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 analysisThe code reads past the end (or before the start) of a buffer, returning memory that was never meant to be exposed. Attackers use it to leak secrets like keys or to defeat memory-protection defences. Remediation is validating indices and lengths before every read.
General guidance for the out-of-bounds read class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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>= 6.8, < 6.8.8= 6.9CVSS 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 · scoped6.8.8
Linux kernel 6.8.8+ (for 6.8.x branch) or 6.10+ (for mainline)
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 6.8.8 or later if running 6.8.x
- If running kernel 6.9, upgrade to 6.10 or later which contains the fix
- After kernel upgrade, reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
- Verify the fix by running the private_mem_conversions_test selftest if KVM testing is needed
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-2024-26991 — 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-2024-26991 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