CVE-2024-35894
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: mptcp: prevent BPF accessing lowat from a subflow socket. Alexei reported the following splat: WARNING: CPU: 32 PID: 3276 at net/mptcp/subflow.c:1430 subflow_data_ready+0x147/0x1c0 Modules linked in: dummy bpf_testmod(O) [last unloaded: bpf_test_no_cfi(O)] CPU: 32 PID: 3276 Comm: test_progs Tainted: GO 6.8.0-12873-g2c43c33bfd23 Call Trace: <TASK> mptcp_set_rcvlowat+0x79/0x1d0 sk_setsockopt+0x6c0/0x1540 __bpf_setsockopt+0x6f/0x90 bpf_sock_ops_setsockopt+0x3c/0x90 bpf_prog_509ce5db2c7f9981_bpf_test_sockopt_int+0xb4/0x11b bpf_prog_dce07e362d941d2b_bpf_test_socket_sockopt+0x12b/0x132 bpf_prog_348c9b5faaf10092_skops_sockopt+0x954/0xe86 __cgroup_bpf_run_filter_sock_ops+0xbc/0x250 tcp_connect+0x879/0x1160 tcp_v6_connect+0x50c/0x870 mptcp_connect+0x129/0x280 __inet_stream_connect+0xce/0x370 inet_stream_connect+0x36/0x50 bpf_trampoline_6442491565+0x49/0xef inet_stream_connect+0x5/0x50 __sys_connect+0x63/0x90 __x64_sys_connect+0x14/0x20 The root cause of the issue is that bpf allows accessing mptcp-level proto_ops from a tcp subflow scope. Fix the issue detecting the problematic call and preventing any action.
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>= 6.7, < 6.8.5= 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 · scoped6.8.5
Linux kernel 6.8.5 or later (or 6.9.1+ if using the 6.9 branch)
- 1. Check the current running kernel version using 'uname -r' or 'cat /proc/version'
- 2. Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 6.8.5 or later (including 6.9.1 or later if using the 6.9 branch)
- 3. For distribution-specific systems, use the package manager to install the updated kernel (e.g., 'apt-get update && apt-get install linux-image-<version>' for Debian/Ubuntu, or 'yum/dnf update kernel' for RHEL/Fedora)
- 4. Reboot the system to load the new kernel
- 5. Verify the new kernel version is running with '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-2024-35894 — 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-2024-35894 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