Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2024-53214
A fix is available.
Upgrade to 4.19.325 / 5.4.287 or later.
See remediation →
80/100
Remediation priority · High
Zero-click
Patch available
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: vfio/pci: Properly hide first-in-list PCIe extended capability There are cases where a PCIe extended capability should be hidden from the user. For example, an unknown capability (i.e., capability with ID greater than PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_MAX) or a capability that is intentionally chosen to be hidden from the user. Hiding a capability is done by virtualizing and modifying the 'Next Capability Offset' field of the previous capability so it points to the capability after the one that should be hidden. The special case where the first capability in the list should be hidden is handled differently because there is no previous capability that can be modified. In this case, the capability ID and version are zeroed while leaving the next pointer intact. This hides the capability and leaves an anchor for the rest of the capability list. However, today, hiding the first capability in the list is not done properly if the capability is unknown, as struct vfio_pci_core_device->pci_config_map is set to the capability ID during initialization but the capability ID is not properly checked later when used in vfio_config_do_rw(). This leads to the following warning [1] and to an out-of-bounds access to ecap_perms array. Fix it by checking cap_id in vfio_config_do_rw(), and if it is greater than PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_MAX, use an alternative struct perm_bits for direct read only access instead of the ecap_perms array. Note that this is safe since the above is the only case where cap_id can exceed PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_MAX (except for the special capabilities, which are already checked before). [1] WARNING: CPU: 118 PID: 5329 at drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_config.c:1900 vfio_pci_config_rw+0x395/0x430 [vfio_pci_core] CPU: 118 UID: 0 PID: 5329 Comm: simx-qemu-syste Not tainted 6.12.0+ #1 (snip) Call Trace: <TASK> ? show_regs+0x69/0x80 ? __warn+0x8d/0x140 ? vfio_pci_config_rw+0x395/0x430 [vfio_pci_core] ? report_bug+0x18f/0x1a0 ? handle_bug+0x63/0xa0 ? exc_invalid_op+0x19/0x70 ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1b/0x20 ? vfio_pci_config_rw+0x395/0x430 [vfio_pci_core] ? vfio_pci_config_rw+0x244/0x430 [vfio_pci_core] vfio_pci_rw+0x101/0x1b0 [vfio_pci_core] vfio_pci_core_read+0x1d/0x30 [vfio_pci_core] vfio_device_fops_read+0x27/0x40 [vfio] vfs_read+0xbd/0x340 ? vfio_device_fops_unl_ioctl+0xbb/0x740 [vfio] ? __rseq_handle_notify_resume+0xa4/0x4b0 __x64_sys_pread64+0x96/0xc0 x64_sys_call+0x1c3d/0x20d0 do_syscall_64+0x4d/0x120 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
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
Linux KernelOperating system
Affected:
>= 3.6, < 4.19.325>= 4.20, < 5.4.287>= 5.5, < 5.10.231>= 5.11, < 5.15.174>= 5.16, < 6.1.120>= 6.2, < 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
- 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 · scoped
Upgrade available
Upgrade to 4.19.325 / 5.4.287 / 5.10.231 or later
Fixed in
4.19.3255.4.2875.10.231
Vendor patch
git.kernel.org →
Recommended fix
High confidence
Upgrade to kernel 4.19.325+/5.4.287+/5.10.231+/5.15.174+ (or later stable release) based on current branch
- Identify the currently running Linux kernel version using `uname -r`
- Determine which version range the current kernel falls into (4.19.x, 5.4.x, 5.10.x, or 5.15.x)
- For kernels in the 4.19.x branch, upgrade to kernel version 4.19.325 or later
- For kernels in the 5.4.x branch, upgrade to kernel version 5.4.287 or later
- For kernels in the 5.10.x branch, upgrade to kernel version 5.10.231 or later
- For kernels in the 5.15.x branch, upgrade to kernel version 5.15.174 or later
- After upgrade, verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version and testing VFIO PCI functionality
- Alternatively, apply the upstream patch from commit 06f2fcf49854ad05a09d09e0dbee6544fff04695 if building a custom kernel
Caveat Kernel upgrades may require system reboot and could introduce regressions; test in non-production environment first
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
We can perform the upgrade in your staging environment and verify nothing breaks — typical engagement from $1,950.
Get the upgrade done
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner
Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-53214 — 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-2024-53214 in production — separate from our analysis above.
Know something about CVE-2024-53214?
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.
What this is
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.
What belongs here
- 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