CVE-2024-35794
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: dm-raid: really frozen sync_thread during suspend 1) commit f52f5c71f3d4 ("md: fix stopping sync thread") remove MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN from __md_stop_writes() and doesn't realize that dm-raid relies on __md_stop_writes() to frozen sync_thread indirectly. Fix this problem by adding MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN in md_stop_writes(), and since stop_sync_thread() is only used for dm-raid in this case, also move stop_sync_thread() to md_stop_writes(). 2) The flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN doesn't mean that sync thread is frozen, it only prevent new sync_thread to start, and it can't stop the running sync thread; In order to frozen sync_thread, after seting the flag, stop_sync_thread() should be used. 3) The flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN doesn't mean that writes are stopped, use it as condition for md_stop_writes() in raid_postsuspend() doesn't look correct. Consider that reentrant stop_sync_thread() do nothing, always call md_stop_writes() in raid_postsuspend(). 4) raid_message can set/clear the flag MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN at anytime, and if MD_RECOVERY_FROZEN is cleared while the array is suspended, new sync_thread can start unexpected. Fix this by disallow raid_message() to change sync_thread status during suspend. Note that after commit f52f5c71f3d4 ("md: fix stopping sync thread"), the test shell/lvconvert-raid-reshape.sh start to hang in stop_sync_thread(), and with previous fixes, the test won't hang there anymore, however, the test will still fail and complain that ext4 is corrupted. And with this patch, the test won't hang due to stop_sync_thread() or fail due to ext4 is corrupted anymore. However, there is still a deadlock related to dm-raid456 that will be fixed in following patches.
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>= 4.8, < 6.7.12>= 6.8, < 6.8.3CVSS 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 · scoped6.7.126.8.3
Linux kernel 6.7.12 or later, or 6.8.3 or later
- 1. Identify current kernel version using 'uname -r' command
- 2. Plan downtime as kernel upgrade requires system reboot
- 3. Upgrade to Linux kernel version 6.7.12 or later (if using 6.7.x branch), or version 6.8.3 or later (if using 6.8.x branch)
- 4. Update boot loader configuration if necessary to ensure new kernel is selected
- 5. Reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
- 6. Verify kernel version after reboot using 'uname -r'
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-2024-35794 — 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-2024-35794 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