CVE-2024-53195
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: KVM: arm64: Get rid of userspace_irqchip_in_use Improper use of userspace_irqchip_in_use led to syzbot hitting the following WARN_ON() in kvm_timer_update_irq(): WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 3281 at arch/arm64/kvm/arch_timer.c:459 kvm_timer_update_irq+0x21c/0x394 Call trace: kvm_timer_update_irq+0x21c/0x394 arch/arm64/kvm/arch_timer.c:459 kvm_timer_vcpu_reset+0x158/0x684 arch/arm64/kvm/arch_timer.c:968 kvm_reset_vcpu+0x3b4/0x560 arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c:264 kvm_vcpu_set_target arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c:1553 [inline] kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_vcpu_init arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c:1573 [inline] kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl+0x112c/0x1b3c arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c:1695 kvm_vcpu_ioctl+0x4ec/0xf74 virt/kvm/kvm_main.c:4658 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:907 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:893 [inline] __arm64_sys_ioctl+0x108/0x184 fs/ioctl.c:893 __invoke_syscall arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:35 [inline] invoke_syscall+0x78/0x1b8 arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:49 el0_svc_common+0xe8/0x1b0 arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:132 do_el0_svc+0x40/0x50 arch/arm64/kernel/syscall.c:151 el0_svc+0x54/0x14c arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:712 el0t_64_sync_handler+0x84/0xfc arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:730 el0t_64_sync+0x190/0x194 arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S:598 The following sequence led to the scenario: - Userspace creates a VM and a vCPU. - The vCPU is initialized with KVM_ARM_VCPU_PMU_V3 during KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT. - Without any other setup, such as vGIC or vPMU, userspace issues KVM_RUN on the vCPU. Since the vPMU is requested, but not setup, kvm_arm_pmu_v3_enable() fails in kvm_arch_vcpu_run_pid_change(). As a result, KVM_RUN returns after enabling the timer, but before incrementing 'userspace_irqchip_in_use': kvm_arch_vcpu_run_pid_change() ret = kvm_arm_pmu_v3_enable() if (!vcpu->arch.pmu.created) return -EINVAL; if (ret) return ret; [...] if (!irqchip_in_kernel(kvm)) static_branch_inc(&userspace_irqchip_in_use); - Userspace ignores the error and issues KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT again. Since the timer is already enabled, control moves through the following flow, ultimately hitting the WARN_ON(): kvm_timer_vcpu_reset() if (timer->enabled) kvm_timer_update_irq() if (!userspace_irqchip()) ret = kvm_vgic_inject_irq() ret = vgic_lazy_init() if (unlikely(!vgic_initialized(kvm))) if (kvm->arch.vgic.vgic_model != KVM_DEV_TYPE_ARM_VGIC_V2) return -EBUSY; WARN_ON(ret); Theoretically, since userspace_irqchip_in_use's functionality can be simply replaced by '!irqchip_in_kernel()', get rid of the static key to avoid the mismanagement, which also helps with the syzbot issue.
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< 6.6.64>= 6.7, < 6.11.11>= 6.12, < 6.12.2CVSS 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 · scoped6.6.646.11.116.12.2
6.6.64 / 6.11.11 / 6.12.2 (choose the appropriate stable branch for your deployment)
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 6.6.64 or later if using the 6.6.x stable branch
- Alternatively, upgrade to version 6.11.11 or later if using the 6.7-6.11 stable branch
- Alternatively, upgrade to version 6.12.2 or later if using the 6.12 stable branch
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-2024-53195 — 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-2024-53195 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