CVE-2024-47025
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 ppmp_protect_buf of drm_fw.c, there is a possible information disclosure due to a logic error in the code. 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 logic error in the ppmp_protect_buf function within the Linux kernel's DRM firmware code (drm_fw.c) allows a local attacker to read sensitive information from kernel memory without any privileges or user interaction. The vulnerability stems from incorrect conditional logic that fails to properly protect or initialize a buffer, potentially exposing kernel memory contents.
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 kernel versionCheck the running kernel version using 'uname -r' or examine /proc/versionAffected if The kernel version is within the range that includes the vulnerable drm_fw.c code with the ppmp_protect_buf function
-
Verify the presence of vulnerable DRM firmware codeSearch for the ppmp_protect_buf function in the kernel source or binary, typically in drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fw.c or equivalentAffected if The function exists and the conditional logic fails to properly protect or initialize the buffer as described in the CVE
-
Determine if DRM firmware loading is enabledCheck kernel configuration for CONFIG_DRM and related firmware loading options, or inspect loaded DRM modules via 'lsmod | grep drm'Affected if DRM firmware support is compiled into the kernel and the specific code path in drm_fw.c is reachable
-
Confirm the affected componentVerify the system uses the Linux kernel DRM subsystem (Direct Rendering Manager) for graphics firmware managementAffected if The system runs a Linux kernel-based Android OS that loads DRM firmware through the vulnerable ppmp_protect_buf function
The environment is affected if it runs Google Android with a Linux kernel containing the vulnerable ppmp_protect_buf function in drm_fw.c where the logic error allows kernel memory disclosure.
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 upstream kernel patch that corrects the logic in ppmp_protect_buf to properly initialize or validate buffers. Distribute via kernel security update.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,192.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-47025 — 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-2024-47025 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