Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-26698 is a medium-severity Race Condition (CWE-362) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 4.7 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 8th 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 SC-39 (Process Isolation) and SC-4 (Information in Shared System Resources) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-23960
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: hv_netvsc: Fix race condition between netvsc_probe and netvsc_remove In commit ac5047671758 ("hv_netvsc: Disable NAPI before closing the VMBus channel"), napi_disable was getting called for all channels, including all subchannels without…
more
confirming if they are enabled or not. This caused hv_netvsc getting hung at napi_disable, when netvsc_probe() has finished running but nvdev->subchan_work has not started yet. netvsc_subchan_work() -> rndis_set_subchannel() has not created the sub-channels and because of that netvsc_sc_open() is not running. netvsc_remove() calls cancel_work_sync(&nvdev->subchan_work), for which netvsc_subchan_work did not run. netif_napi_add() sets the bit NAPI_STATE_SCHED because it ensures NAPI cannot be scheduled. Then netvsc_sc_open() -> napi_enable will clear the NAPIF_STATE_SCHED bit, so it can be scheduled. napi_disable() does the opposite. Now during netvsc_device_remove(), when napi_disable is called for those subchannels, napi_disable gets stuck on infinite msleep. This fix addresses this problem by ensuring that napi_disable() is not getting called for non-enabled NAPI struct. But netif_napi_del() is still necessary for these non-enabled NAPI struct for cleanup purpose. Call trace: [ 654.559417] task:modprobe state:D stack: 0 pid: 2321 ppid: 1091 flags:0x00004002 [ 654.568030] Call Trace: [ 654.571221] <TASK> [ 654.573790] __schedule+0x2d6/0x960 [ 654.577733] schedule+0x69/0xf0 [ 654.581214] schedule_timeout+0x87/0x140 [ 654.585463] ? __bpf_trace_tick_stop+0x20/0x20 [ 654.590291] msleep+0x2d/0x40 [ 654.593625] napi_disable+0x2b/0x80 [ 654.597437] netvsc_device_remove+0x8a/0x1f0 [hv_netvsc] [ 654.603935] rndis_filter_device_remove+0x194/0x1c0 [hv_netvsc] [ 654.611101] ? do_wait_intr+0xb0/0xb0 [ 654.615753] netvsc_remove+0x7c/0x120 [hv_netvsc] [ 654.621675] vmbus_remove+0x27/0x40 [hv_vmbus]
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V10.4.2V10.4.5V15.1.3V15.4.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
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.
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 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.
Security testing can detect race conditions, but does not prevent them at design or coding time.
Secure SDLC mandates concurrency controls and synchronization primitives that directly prevent race conditions.
Application security requirements can specify thread-safety and locking rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture principles require proper synchronization and resource isolation, addressing the root cause of CWE-362.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe concurrent access patterns and mandate atomic operations or locks.
Change management reduces introduction of concurrency bugs during updates, yet does not address the weakness itself.