CVE-2024-49952
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: netfilter: nf_tables: prevent nf_skb_duplicated corruption syzbot found that nf_dup_ipv4() or nf_dup_ipv6() could write per-cpu variable nf_skb_duplicated in an unsafe way [1]. Disabling preemption as hinted by the splat is not enough, we have to disable soft interrupts as well. [1] BUG: using __this_cpu_write() in preemptible [00000000] code: syz.4.282/6316 caller is nf_dup_ipv4+0x651/0x8f0 net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_dup_ipv4.c:87 CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6316 Comm: syz.4.282 Not tainted 6.11.0-rc7-syzkaller-00104-g7052622fccb1 #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 08/06/2024 Call Trace: <TASK> __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:93 [inline] dump_stack_lvl+0x241/0x360 lib/dump_stack.c:119 check_preemption_disabled+0x10e/0x120 lib/smp_processor_id.c:49 nf_dup_ipv4+0x651/0x8f0 net/ipv4/netfilter/nf_dup_ipv4.c:87 nft_dup_ipv4_eval+0x1db/0x300 net/ipv4/netfilter/nft_dup_ipv4.c:30 expr_call_ops_eval net/netfilter/nf_tables_core.c:240 [inline] nft_do_chain+0x4ad/0x1da0 net/netfilter/nf_tables_core.c:288 nft_do_chain_ipv4+0x202/0x320 net/netfilter/nft_chain_filter.c:23 nf_hook_entry_hookfn include/linux/netfilter.h:154 [inline] nf_hook_slow+0xc3/0x220 net/netfilter/core.c:626 nf_hook+0x2c4/0x450 include/linux/netfilter.h:269 NF_HOOK_COND include/linux/netfilter.h:302 [inline] ip_output+0x185/0x230 net/ipv4/ip_output.c:433 ip_local_out net/ipv4/ip_output.c:129 [inline] ip_send_skb+0x74/0x100 net/ipv4/ip_output.c:1495 udp_send_skb+0xacf/0x1650 net/ipv4/udp.c:981 udp_sendmsg+0x1c21/0x2a60 net/ipv4/udp.c:1269 sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:730 [inline] __sock_sendmsg+0x1a6/0x270 net/socket.c:745 ____sys_sendmsg+0x525/0x7d0 net/socket.c:2597 ___sys_sendmsg net/socket.c:2651 [inline] __sys_sendmmsg+0x3b2/0x740 net/socket.c:2737 __do_sys_sendmmsg net/socket.c:2766 [inline] __se_sys_sendmmsg net/socket.c:2763 [inline] __x64_sys_sendmmsg+0xa0/0xb0 net/socket.c:2763 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:52 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 arch/x86/entry/common.c:83 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f RIP: 0033:0x7f4ce4f7def9 Code: ff ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 40 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 a8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48 RSP: 002b:00007f4ce5d4a038 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000133 RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007f4ce5135f80 RCX: 00007f4ce4f7def9 RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000000020005d40 RDI: 0000000000000006 RBP: 00007f4ce4ff0b76 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000 R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 00007f4ce5135f80 R15: 00007ffd4cbc6d68 </TASK>
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>= 4.3, < 4.19.323>= 4.20, < 5.4.285>= 5.5, < 5.10.227>= 5.11, < 5.15.168>= 5.16, < 6.1.113>= 6.2, < 6.6.55>= 6.7, < 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
- 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 · scoped4.19.3235.4.2855.10.227
Upgrade to kernel >= 4.19.323 (for 4.19.x), >= 5.4.285 (for 5.4.x), >= 5.10.227 (for 5.10.x), or >= 5.15.168 (for 5.15.x)
- Identify the current running kernel version using `uname -r`
- Determine which kernel branch your current version belongs to (4.19.x, 5.4.x, 5.10.x, or 5.15.x)
- Update the system package manager to fetch the latest available kernel packages
- Upgrade the kernel to a version that includes the fix: for 4.19.x branch use >=4.19.323, for 5.4.x branch use >=5.4.285, for 5.10.x branch use >=5.10.227, for 5.15.x branch use >=5.15.168
- Reboot the system to load the new kernel
- Verify the running kernel is now a fixed version using `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-2024-49952 — 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-2024-49952 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