CVE-2024-42111
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: btrfs: always do the basic checks for btrfs_qgroup_inherit structure [BUG] Syzbot reports the following regression detected by KASAN: BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in btrfs_qgroup_inherit+0x42e/0x2e20 fs/btrfs/qgroup.c:3277 Read of size 8 at addr ffff88814628ca50 by task syz-executor318/5171 CPU: 0 PID: 5171 Comm: syz-executor318 Not tainted 6.10.0-rc2-syzkaller-00010-g2ab795141095 #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 04/02/2024 Call Trace: <TASK> __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:88 [inline] dump_stack_lvl+0x241/0x360 lib/dump_stack.c:114 print_address_description mm/kasan/report.c:377 [inline] print_report+0x169/0x550 mm/kasan/report.c:488 kasan_report+0x143/0x180 mm/kasan/report.c:601 btrfs_qgroup_inherit+0x42e/0x2e20 fs/btrfs/qgroup.c:3277 create_pending_snapshot+0x1359/0x29b0 fs/btrfs/transaction.c:1854 create_pending_snapshots+0x195/0x1d0 fs/btrfs/transaction.c:1922 btrfs_commit_transaction+0xf20/0x3740 fs/btrfs/transaction.c:2382 create_snapshot+0x6a1/0x9e0 fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:875 btrfs_mksubvol+0x58f/0x710 fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:1029 btrfs_mksnapshot+0xb5/0xf0 fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:1075 __btrfs_ioctl_snap_create+0x387/0x4b0 fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:1340 btrfs_ioctl_snap_create_v2+0x1f2/0x3a0 fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:1422 btrfs_ioctl+0x99e/0xc60 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:907 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:893 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f RIP: 0033:0x7fcbf1992509 RSP: 002b:00007fcbf1928218 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010 RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007fcbf1a1f618 RCX: 00007fcbf1992509 RDX: 0000000020000280 RSI: 0000000050009417 RDI: 0000000000000003 RBP: 00007fcbf1a1f610 R08: 00007ffea1298e97 R09: 0000000000000000 R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00007fcbf19eb660 R13: 00000000200002b8 R14: 00007fcbf19e60c0 R15: 0030656c69662f2e </TASK> And it also pinned it down to commit b5357cb268c4 ("btrfs: qgroup: do not check qgroup inherit if qgroup is disabled"). [CAUSE] That offending commit skips the whole qgroup inherit check if qgroup is not enabled. But that also skips the very basic checks like num_ref_copies/num_excl_copies and the structure size checks. Meaning if a qgroup enable/disable race is happening at the background, and we pass a btrfs_qgroup_inherit structure when the qgroup is disabled, the check would be completely skipped. Then at the time of transaction commitment, qgroup is re-enabled and btrfs_qgroup_inherit() is going to use the incorrect structure and causing the above KASAN error. [FIX] Make btrfs_qgroup_check_inherit() only skip the source qgroup checks. So that even if invalid btrfs_qgroup_inherit structure is passed in, we can still reject invalid ones no matter if qgroup is enabled or not. Furthermore we do already have an extra safety inside btrfs_qgroup_inherit(), which would just ignore invalid qgroup sources, so even if we only skip the qgroup source check we're still safe.
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>= 6.8.10, < 6.9>= 6.9.1, < 6.9.9= 6.9= 6.10CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 · scoped6.96.9.9
6.9.9+ or 6.10.1+
- Upgrade Linux kernel to version 6.9.9 or later, or to version 6.10.1 or later
- Alternatively, upgrade to any stable kernel version that includes the patch commit 724d8042cef84496ddb4492dc120291f997ae26b
- Verify the fix by ensuring the kernel version is >= 6.9.9 or >= 6.10.1 after upgrade
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-2024-42111 — 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-2024-42111 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