CVE-2024-0639
Redhat Enterprise Linux 8.0 … 9.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-0639 is a medium-severity Deadlock (CWE-833) vulnerability in Redhat Enterprise Linux. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Junk Data (T1001.001); ranked at the 7th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-16431
Vulnerability Data
A denial of service vulnerability due to a deadlock was found in sctp_auto_asconf_init in net/sctp/socket.c in the Linux kernel’s SCTP subsystem. This flaw allows guests with local user privileges to trigger a deadlock and potentially crash the system.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V15.4.3
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation activities can exercise concurrent paths and resource contention to discover deadlock conditions before deployment.
Security engineering principles applied during design can incorporate synchronization ordering, timeouts, and resource hierarchies that structurally avoid deadlock formation.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices can include concurrency analysis and lock discipline to avoid deadlock conditions.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
A.8.25 mandates a secure SDLC process with checkpoints, secure coding, testing and training; none of those steps stop an existing deadlock from being exploitable, they only aim to reduce the chance one is introduced
A.8.27 mandates establishing and applying secure engineering principles (defense-in-depth, least privilege, fail securely, security by design, etc.) and performing design reviews; deadlock is a runtime concurrency flaw in implementation or threading logic that these principles and reviews do not stop from being introduced or exploited.
Secure coding standards mandate safe lock ordering, timeouts, and deadlock detection patterns.
Security testing in development can detect deadlock conditions through stress and concurrency testing.
Change management may catch locking issues introduced by modifications but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Hardening callouts derived
DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.
- No fine-grained STIG row for CWE-667, a class-level weakness, and none of its children carries one either.