CVE-2024-49880
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: ext4: fix off by one issue in alloc_flex_gd() Wesley reported an issue: ================================================================== EXT4-fs (dm-5): resizing filesystem from 7168 to 786432 blocks ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/ext4/resize.c:324! CPU: 9 UID: 0 PID: 3576 Comm: resize2fs Not tainted 6.11.0+ #27 RIP: 0010:ext4_resize_fs+0x1212/0x12d0 Call Trace: __ext4_ioctl+0x4e0/0x1800 ext4_ioctl+0x12/0x20 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x99/0xd0 x64_sys_call+0x1206/0x20d0 do_syscall_64+0x72/0x110 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e ================================================================== While reviewing the patch, Honza found that when adjusting resize_bg in alloc_flex_gd(), it was possible for flex_gd->resize_bg to be bigger than flexbg_size. The reproduction of the problem requires the following: o_group = flexbg_size * 2 * n; o_size = (o_group + 1) * group_size; n_group: [o_group + flexbg_size, o_group + flexbg_size * 2) o_size = (n_group + 1) * group_size; Take n=0,flexbg_size=16 as an example: last:15 |o---------------|--------------n-| o_group:0 resize to n_group:30 The corresponding reproducer is: img=test.img rm -f $img truncate -s 600M $img mkfs.ext4 -F $img -b 1024 -G 16 8M dev=`losetup -f --show $img` mkdir -p /tmp/test mount $dev /tmp/test resize2fs $dev 248M Delete the problematic plus 1 to fix the issue, and add a WARN_ON_ONCE() to prevent the issue from happening again. [ Note: another reproucer which this commit fixes is: img=test.img rm -f $img truncate -s 25MiB $img mkfs.ext4 -b 4096 -E nodiscard,lazy_itable_init=0,lazy_journal_init=0 $img truncate -s 3GiB $img dev=`losetup -f --show $img` mkdir -p /tmp/test mount $dev /tmp/test resize2fs $dev 3G umount $dev losetup -d $dev -- TYT ]
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>= 6.8, < 6.10.14>= 6.11, < 6.11.3= 6.12CVSS 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
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 · scoped6.10.146.11.3
6.10.14+/6.11.3+/6.12.1+ (stable kernel releases)
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 6.10.14 or later for the 6.10.x stable branch
- Alternatively, upgrade to version 6.11.3 or later for the 6.11.x stable branch
- Alternatively, upgrade to version 6.12.1 or later for the 6.12.x stable branch
- After kernel upgrade, reboot the system to load the fixed kernel version
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version: 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-2024-49880 — 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-2024-49880 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