CVE-2024-47018
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 pmucal_rae_handle_seq_int of flexpmu_cal_rae.c, there is a possible out of bounds read due to a buffer overflow. This could lead to local information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.
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 analysis · moderate confidenceA buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the pmucal_rae_handle_seq_int function within flexpmu_cal_rae.c, allowing an out-of-bounds read that leads to local information disclosure. The issue stems from insufficient bounds checking when handling sequence data in the Performance Monitoring Unit (PMU) calibration code. No user interaction or elevated privileges are required for exploitation.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the Android kernel versionRun 'uname -r' or check /proc/version to obtain the kernel build stringAffected if The kernel version predates the vendor patch for this vulnerability (no specific fixed version identified in provided data)
-
Verify presence of PMU calibration componentCheck if /sys/kernel/debug or /proc/modules contains references to 'pmucal', 'flexpmu', or 'pmu_cal' components that indicate the vulnerable calibration code is presentAffected if The PMU calibration module (flexpmu_cal_rae) is present and loaded in the kernel
-
Confirm the vulnerable function existsSearch for the function symbol 'pmucal_rae_handle_seq_int' in /proc/kallsyms or vmlinux if availableAffected if The function symbol pmucal_rae_handle_seq_int is found in the running kernel, indicating the unpatched code path exists
-
Check for security bulletin or vendor noticeReview the device manufacturer's security update bulletin for CVE-2024-47018 statusAffected if The device is on an Android version whose vendor security patch level predates the CVE-2024-47018 fix date
A user is affected if running an Android kernel that contains the flexpmu_cal_rae.c component with the pmucal_rae_handle_seq_int function and the vendor has not yet issued a security patch for this CVE.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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.
From vendor dataApply the vendor-supplied kernel patch which adds proper bounds validation in the pmucal_rae_handle_seq_int function to prevent the buffer overflow. Update to a kernel version containing the fix.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,472.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-47018 — 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-2024-47018 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