CVE-2024-47702
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: bpf: Fail verification for sign-extension of packet data/data_end/data_meta syzbot reported a kernel crash due to commit 1f1e864b6555 ("bpf: Handle sign-extenstin ctx member accesses"). The reason is due to sign-extension of 32-bit load for packet data/data_end/data_meta uapi field. The original code looks like: r2 = *(s32 *)(r1 + 76) /* load __sk_buff->data */ r3 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 80) /* load __sk_buff->data_end */ r0 = r2 r0 += 8 if r3 > r0 goto +1 ... Note that __sk_buff->data load has 32-bit sign extension. After verification and convert_ctx_accesses(), the final asm code looks like: r2 = *(u64 *)(r1 +208) r2 = (s32)r2 r3 = *(u64 *)(r1 +80) r0 = r2 r0 += 8 if r3 > r0 goto pc+1 ... Note that 'r2 = (s32)r2' may make the kernel __sk_buff->data address invalid which may cause runtime failure. Currently, in C code, typically we have void *data = (void *)(long)skb->data; void *data_end = (void *)(long)skb->data_end; ... and it will generate r2 = *(u64 *)(r1 +208) r3 = *(u64 *)(r1 +80) r0 = r2 r0 += 8 if r3 > r0 goto pc+1 If we allow sign-extension, void *data = (void *)(long)(int)skb->data; void *data_end = (void *)(long)skb->data_end; ... the generated code looks like r2 = *(u64 *)(r1 +208) r2 <<= 32 r2 s>>= 32 r3 = *(u64 *)(r1 +80) r0 = r2 r0 += 8 if r3 > r0 goto pc+1 and this will cause verification failure since "r2 <<= 32" is not allowed as "r2" is a packet pointer. To fix this issue for case r2 = *(s32 *)(r1 + 76) /* load __sk_buff->data */ this patch added additional checking in is_valid_access() callback function for packet data/data_end/data_meta access. If those accesses are with sign-extenstion, the verification will fail. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]/
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>= 6.6, < 6.10.13>= 6.11, < 6.11.2CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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 · scoped6.10.136.11.2
Linux Kernel 6.10.13 or later for 6.6-6.10.x branches; Linux Kernel 6.11.2 or later for 6.11.x branch
- Identify the currently running kernel version using 'uname -r' or 'cat /proc/version'
- If running kernel >= 6.6 and < 6.10.13: Plan to upgrade to kernel version 6.10.13 or later
- If running kernel >= 6.11 and < 6.11.2: Plan to upgrade to kernel version 6.11.2 or later
- Consult your Linux distribution's documentation for the specific upgrade procedure (e.g., 'apt-get update && apt-get upgrade' for Debian/Ubuntu, 'yum update' for RHEL/CentOS, or 'dnf upgrade' for Fedora)
- After upgrading, reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
- 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-2024-47702 — 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-2024-47702 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