CVE-2024-53112
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: ocfs2: uncache inode which has failed entering the group Syzbot has reported the following BUG: kernel BUG at fs/ocfs2/uptodate.c:509! ... Call Trace: <TASK> ? __die_body+0x5f/0xb0 ? die+0x9e/0xc0 ? do_trap+0x15a/0x3a0 ? ocfs2_set_new_buffer_uptodate+0x145/0x160 ? do_error_trap+0x1dc/0x2c0 ? ocfs2_set_new_buffer_uptodate+0x145/0x160 ? __pfx_do_error_trap+0x10/0x10 ? handle_invalid_op+0x34/0x40 ? ocfs2_set_new_buffer_uptodate+0x145/0x160 ? exc_invalid_op+0x38/0x50 ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20 ? ocfs2_set_new_buffer_uptodate+0x2e/0x160 ? ocfs2_set_new_buffer_uptodate+0x144/0x160 ? ocfs2_set_new_buffer_uptodate+0x145/0x160 ocfs2_group_add+0x39f/0x15a0 ? __pfx_ocfs2_group_add+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 ? mnt_get_write_access+0x68/0x2b0 ? __pfx_lock_release+0x10/0x10 ? rcu_read_lock_any_held+0xb7/0x160 ? __pfx_rcu_read_lock_any_held+0x10/0x10 ? smack_log+0x123/0x540 ? mnt_get_write_access+0x68/0x2b0 ? mnt_get_write_access+0x68/0x2b0 ? mnt_get_write_access+0x226/0x2b0 ocfs2_ioctl+0x65e/0x7d0 ? __pfx_ocfs2_ioctl+0x10/0x10 ? smack_file_ioctl+0x29e/0x3a0 ? __pfx_smack_file_ioctl+0x10/0x10 ? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x43d/0x780 ? __pfx_lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_ocfs2_ioctl+0x10/0x10 __se_sys_ioctl+0xfb/0x170 do_syscall_64+0xf3/0x230 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f ... </TASK> When 'ioctl(OCFS2_IOC_GROUP_ADD, ...)' has failed for the particular inode in 'ocfs2_verify_group_and_input()', corresponding buffer head remains cached and subsequent call to the same 'ioctl()' for the same inode issues the BUG() in 'ocfs2_set_new_buffer_uptodate()' (trying to cache the same buffer head of that inode). Fix this by uncaching the buffer head with 'ocfs2_remove_from_cache()' on error path in 'ocfs2_group_add()'.
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>= 2.6.25, < 4.19.325>= 4.20, < 6.1.119>= 6.2, < 6.6.63>= 6.7, < 6.11.10= 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 · scoped4.19.3256.1.1196.6.63
4.19.325, 6.1.119, 6.6.63, or 6.11.10 (whichever is compatible with your distribution)
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to one of the fixed releases: 4.19.325, 6.1.119, 6.6.63, or 6.11.10
- Alternatively, apply the vendor patch from commit 620d22598110b0d0cb97a3fcca65fc473ea86e73 which adds ocfs2_remove_from_cache() call to uncache the buffer head on the error path in ocfs2_group_add()
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-2024-53112 — 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-2024-53112 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