CVE-2024-47024
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 vring_size of external/headers/include/virtio/virtio_ring.h, there is a possible out of bounds write due to an integer overflow. This could lead to local escalation of privilege 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 · high confidenceAn integer overflow vulnerability exists in the vring_size function within virtio_ring.h. The function calculates memory allocation sizes for virtual rings used in virtio drivers without proper overflow validation, allowing an attacker to trigger allocation of undersized buffers and achieve local privilege escalation.
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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 if the device uses virtio driversCheck for virtio kernel modules (lsmod | grep virtio) or examine /sys/bus/virtio/devices/ for virtio device entries. Also check /proc/devices for virtio backend devices.Affected if Virtio drivers or devices are present on the Android device, making the vring_size function code path active
-
Locate and examine the vring_size function in the kernelSearch the kernel source or boot image for virtio_ring.h and locate the vring_size function. On a rooted device, find the loaded kernel image and search for the function symbol.Affected if The vring_size function exists in the kernel build and is being used for virtual ring memory calculations
-
Verify the overflow check is missing in vring_sizeExamine the vring_size function code for proper overflow validation before the size calculation (num * sizeof(vring_desc_t) or similar multiplications). Look for absence of checks like: if (num > UINT_MAX / sizeof(...)) return -EINVAL;Affected if The vring_size function lacks integer overflow validation before calculating vring buffer sizes
-
Confirm Android as the affected platformVerify the device runs Google Android OS (check ro.build.fingerprint, ro.product.model, or /system/build.prop). Confirm the kernel is Linux-based and contains virtio support.Affected if The device is confirmed to be running Google Android with a Linux kernel containing virtio support
If the Android device uses virtio drivers and the vring_size function in the kernel lacks overflow validation before calculating vring buffer allocations, the device is affected by CVE-2024-47024.
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 bounds checking and integer overflow validation in the vring_size function before calculating vring buffer allocations. Ensure all arithmetic operations that determine memory sizes are validated against maximum allowable values.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $4,416.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-47024 — 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-2024-47024 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