CVE-2024-56758
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: btrfs: check folio mapping after unlock in relocate_one_folio() When we call btrfs_read_folio() to bring a folio uptodate, we unlock the folio. The result of that is that a different thread can modify the mapping (like remove it with invalidate) before we call folio_lock(). This results in an invalid page and we need to try again. In particular, if we are relocating concurrently with aborting a transaction, this can result in a crash like the following: BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000 PGD 0 P4D 0 Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP CPU: 76 PID: 1411631 Comm: kworker/u322:5 Workqueue: events_unbound btrfs_reclaim_bgs_work RIP: 0010:set_page_extent_mapped+0x20/0xb0 RSP: 0018:ffffc900516a7be8 EFLAGS: 00010246 RAX: ffffea009e851d08 RBX: ffffea009e0b1880 RCX: 0000000000000000 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffc900516a7b90 RDI: ffffea009e0b1880 RBP: 0000000003573000 R08: 0000000000000001 R09: ffff88c07fd2f3f0 R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000194754b575be R12: 0000000003572000 R13: 0000000003572fff R14: 0000000000100cca R15: 0000000005582fff FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88c07fd00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000000000000000 CR3: 000000407d00f002 CR4: 00000000007706f0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 PKRU: 55555554 Call Trace: <TASK> ? __die+0x78/0xc0 ? page_fault_oops+0x2a8/0x3a0 ? __switch_to+0x133/0x530 ? wq_worker_running+0xa/0x40 ? exc_page_fault+0x63/0x130 ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x22/0x30 ? set_page_extent_mapped+0x20/0xb0 relocate_file_extent_cluster+0x1a7/0x940 relocate_data_extent+0xaf/0x120 relocate_block_group+0x20f/0x480 btrfs_relocate_block_group+0x152/0x320 btrfs_relocate_chunk+0x3d/0x120 btrfs_reclaim_bgs_work+0x2ae/0x4e0 process_scheduled_works+0x184/0x370 worker_thread+0xc6/0x3e0 ? blk_add_timer+0xb0/0xb0 kthread+0xae/0xe0 ? flush_tlb_kernel_range+0x90/0x90 ret_from_fork+0x2f/0x40 ? flush_tlb_kernel_range+0x90/0x90 ret_from_fork_asm+0x11/0x20 </TASK> This occurs because cleanup_one_transaction() calls destroy_delalloc_inodes() which calls invalidate_inode_pages2() which takes the folio_lock before setting mapping to NULL. We fail to check this, and subsequently call set_extent_mapping(), which assumes that mapping != NULL (in fact it asserts that in debug mode) Note that the "fixes" patch here is not the one that introduced the race (the very first iteration of this code from 2009) but a more recent change that made this particular crash happen in practice.
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 analysisThe code follows a pointer that is null, crashing the process. An attacker who can reliably trigger it turns the crash into a denial of service. The fix is checking for null before use and handling the failure path gracefully.
General guidance for the null pointer dereference class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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>= 6.1.54, < 6.2>= 6.5.4, < 6.12.8= 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 · scoped6.26.12.8
Linux kernel 6.12.8 or later, or the next stable release in your distribution's kernel tree (e.g., 6.13.x stable)
- Identify the currently running Linux kernel version using `uname -r`
- Based on the affected version ranges (>= 6.1.54, < 6.2; >= 6.5.4, < 6.12.8; = 6.13), determine if your kernel is vulnerable
- Upgrade to a fixed kernel version: Linux 6.12.8 or later, or Linux 6.2 or later (if using the 6.1.x stable branch, upgrade to 6.1.54 or later but note the ranges indicate vulnerability extends through < 6.2)
- For Ubuntu/Debian: `sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade linux-image-generic`
- For RHEL/CentOS: `sudo yum update kernel`
- For other distributions: obtain a kernel update from your distribution vendor that includes the fix commit 3e74859ee35edc33a022c3f3971df066ea0ca6b9
- Reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
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-2024-56758 — 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-2024-56758 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