Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2024-56779
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: nfsd: fix nfs4_openowner leak when concurrent nfsd4_open occur The action force umount(umount -f) will attempt to kill all rpc_task even umount operation may ultimately fail if some files remain open. Consequently, if an action attempts to open a file, it can potentially send two rpc_task to nfs server. NFS CLIENT thread1 thread2 open("file") ... nfs4_do_open _nfs4_do_open _nfs4_open_and_get_state _nfs4_proc_open nfs4_run_open_task /* rpc_task1 */ rpc_run_task rpc_wait_for_completion_task umount -f nfs_umount_begin rpc_killall_tasks rpc_signal_task rpc_task1 been wakeup and return -512 _nfs4_do_open // while loop ... nfs4_run_open_task /* rpc_task2 */ rpc_run_task rpc_wait_for_completion_task While processing an open request, nfsd will first attempt to find or allocate an nfs4_openowner. If it finds an nfs4_openowner that is not marked as NFS4_OO_CONFIRMED, this nfs4_openowner will released. Since two rpc_task can attempt to open the same file simultaneously from the client to server, and because two instances of nfsd can run concurrently, this situation can lead to lots of memory leak. Additionally, when we echo 0 to /proc/fs/nfsd/threads, warning will be triggered. NFS SERVER nfsd1 nfsd2 echo 0 > /proc/fs/nfsd/threads nfsd4_open nfsd4_process_open1 find_or_alloc_open_stateowner // alloc oo1, stateid1 nfsd4_open nfsd4_process_open1 find_or_alloc_open_stateowner // find oo1, without NFS4_OO_CONFIRMED release_openowner unhash_openowner_locked list_del_init(&oo->oo_perclient) // cannot find this oo // from client, LEAK!!! alloc_stateowner // alloc oo2 nfsd4_process_open2 init_open_stateid // associate oo1 // with stateid1, stateid1 LEAK!!! nfs4_get_vfs_file // alloc nfsd_file1 and nfsd_file_mark1 // all LEAK!!! nfsd4_process_open2 ... write_threads ... nfsd_destroy_serv nfsd_shutdown_net nfs4_state_shutdown_net nfs4_state_destroy_net destroy_client __destroy_client // won't find oo1!!! nfsd_shutdown_generic nfsd_file_cache_shutdown kmem_cache_destroy for nfsd_file_slab and nfsd_file_mark_slab // bark since nfsd_file1 // and nfsd_file_mark1 // still alive ======================================================================= BUG nfsd_file (Not tainted): Objects remaining in nfsd_file on __kmem_cache_shutdown() ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Slab 0xffd4000004438a80 objects=34 used=1 fp=0xff11000110e2ad28 flags=0x17ffffc0000240(workingset|head|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1fffff) CPU: 4 UID: 0 PID: 757 Comm: sh Not tainted 6.12.0-rc6+ #19 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.1-2.fc37 04/01/2014 Call Trace: <TASK> dum ---truncated---
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 analysisAllocated memory is never released on some path, so a long-running service or a repeatedly triggered request steadily consumes memory until performance degrades or the process crashes. Attackers exploit it by simply driving the leaking path. Remediation is pairing every allocation with a release and using ownership patterns or tooling to catch what leaks.
General guidance for the memory leak 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
Linux KernelOperating system
< 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, < 6.12.4CVSS 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 · scoped5.4.2875.10.2315.15.174
Linux kernel >= 6.1.120 (or the equivalent stable patch backported to your distribution's kernel)
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 6.1.120 or later, which contains the stable fix commit 0ab0a3ad24e970e894abcac58f85c332d1726749
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-2024-56779 — 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-2024-56779 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