Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-24857

Memory Safety in Linux Kernel ≤ 3.19.8

Published
05 February 2024
Modified
17 June 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 4.6
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L
EPSS Score 0.0032 24th percentile
Risk Priority 36 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-24857 is a medium-severity Race Condition (CWE-362) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 4.6 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 24th 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.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A race condition was found in the Linux kernel's net/bluetooth device driver in conn_info_{min,max}_age_set() function. This can result in integrity overflow issue, possibly leading to bluetooth connection abnormality or denial of service.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-38193Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-41000Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-42136Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2025-38222Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-26817Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2025-37857Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2025-37858Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2023-35823Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2023-35824Same product: Debian Debian Linux
CVE-2024-35905Same product: Debian Debian Linux

Affected Assets

debian
debian linux
10.0
linux
linux kernel
6.8 · ≤ 3.19.8 · 6.0 — 6.6.25 · 6.7 — 6.7.12

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V10.4.2
  • V5.2.6
  • V10.4.5
  • V15.1.3

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and evaluation (static analysis, fuzzing, unit tests) directly finds integer overflow defects before deployment.

Secure engineering principles require use of safe arithmetic constructs or language features that structurally eliminate integer overflow during calculation.

Maintaining separate execution domains for each process structurally eliminates unintended concurrent access to the same shared resources.

Preventing unintended information transfer through shared system resources directly addresses the improper concurrent modification that defines a race condition.

Input validation enforces bounds on values before arithmetic, stopping the conditions that trigger overflow or wraparound.

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require proper synchronization primitives and concurrency testing that prevent race 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.

finds

Security testing can detect race conditions, but does not prevent them at design or coding time.

prevents

Secure SDLC mandates concurrency controls and synchronization primitives that directly prevent race conditions.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify thread-safety and locking rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.

prevents

Secure architecture principles require proper synchronization and resource isolation, addressing the root cause of CWE-362.

prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe concurrent access patterns and mandate atomic operations or locks.

none

Change management reduces introduction of concurrency bugs during updates, yet does not address the weakness itself.

References