CVE-2024-53690
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: nilfs2: prevent use of deleted inode syzbot reported a WARNING in nilfs_rmdir. [1] Because the inode bitmap is corrupted, an inode with an inode number that should exist as a ".nilfs" file was reassigned by nilfs_mkdir for "file0", causing an inode duplication during execution. And this causes an underflow of i_nlink in rmdir operations. The inode is used twice by the same task to unmount and remove directories ".nilfs" and "file0", it trigger warning in nilfs_rmdir. Avoid to this issue, check i_nlink in nilfs_iget(), if it is 0, it means that this inode has been deleted, and iput is executed to reclaim it. [1] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 5824 at fs/inode.c:407 drop_nlink+0xc4/0x110 fs/inode.c:407 ... Call Trace: <TASK> nilfs_rmdir+0x1b0/0x250 fs/nilfs2/namei.c:342 vfs_rmdir+0x3a3/0x510 fs/namei.c:4394 do_rmdir+0x3b5/0x580 fs/namei.c:4453 __do_sys_rmdir fs/namei.c:4472 [inline] __se_sys_rmdir fs/namei.c:4470 [inline] __x64_sys_rmdir+0x47/0x50 fs/namei.c:4470 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
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>= 2.6.30, < 5.4.289>= 5.5, < 5.10.233>= 5.11, < 5.15.176>= 5.16, < 6.1.122>= 6.2, < 6.6.68>= 6.7, < 6.12.7= 6.13CVSS 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 · scoped5.4.2895.10.2335.15.176
Kernel version >=5.4.289, >=5.10.233, >=5.15.176, or >=6.1.122 depending on your current branch
- Identify the currently running Linux kernel version using 'uname -r'
- Determine which version range your current kernel falls into from the affected ranges
- Upgrade to a kernel version that includes the fix: for 5.4.x series upgrade to >=5.4.289, for 5.10.x series upgrade to >=5.10.233, for 5.15.x series upgrade to >=5.15.176, or for 6.1.x series upgrade to >=6.1.122
- Use your distribution's standard kernel upgrade procedure (e.g., apt-get update && apt-get install linux-image-* for Debian/Ubuntu, or yum/dnf update for RHEL/Fedora)
- Reboot the system into the new kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version and nilfs2 module loaded
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-2024-53690 — 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-2024-53690 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