Security Resilience

CVE-2024-26837

Race Condition in Linux Kernel 5.13 – 6.1.80

Published
17 April 2024
Modified
02 April 2025
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 4.7
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0017 5th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2024-26837 is a medium-severity Race Condition (CWE-362) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 4.7 (Medium).

Operationally, ranked at the 5th 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

Vulnerability Data

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: bridge: switchdev: Skip MDB replays of deferred events on offload Before this change, generation of the list of MDB events to replay would race against the creation of new…

more

group memberships, either from the IGMP/MLD snooping logic or from user configuration. While new memberships are immediately visible to walkers of br->mdb_list, the notification of their existence to switchdev event subscribers is deferred until a later point in time. So if a replay list was generated during a time that overlapped with such a window, it would also contain a replay of the not-yet-delivered event. The driver would thus receive two copies of what the bridge internally considered to be one single event. On destruction of the bridge, only a single membership deletion event was therefore sent. As a consequence of this, drivers which reference count memberships (at least DSA), would be left with orphan groups in their hardware database when the bridge was destroyed. This is only an issue when replaying additions. While deletion events may still be pending on the deferred queue, they will already have been removed from br->mdb_list, so no duplicates can be generated in that scenario. To a user this meant that old group memberships, from a bridge in which a port was previously attached, could be reanimated (in hardware) when the port joined a new bridge, without the new bridge's knowledge. For example, on an mv88e6xxx system, create a snooping bridge and immediately add a port to it: root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ ip link add dev br0 up type bridge mcast_snooping 1 && \ > ip link set dev x3 up master br0 And then destroy the bridge: root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ ip link del dev br0 root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ mvls atu ADDRESS FID STATE Q F 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a DEV:0 Marvell 88E6393X 33:33:00:00:00:6a 1 static - - 0 . . . . . . . . . . 33:33:ff:87:e4:3f 1 static - - 0 . . . . . . . . . . ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 1 static - - 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ The two IPv6 groups remain in the hardware database because the port (x3) is notified of the host's membership twice: once via the original event and once via a replay. Since only a single delete notification is sent, the count remains at 1 when the bridge is destroyed. Then add the same port (or another port belonging to the same hardware domain) to a new bridge, this time with snooping disabled: root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ ip link add dev br1 up type bridge mcast_snooping 0 && \ > ip link set dev x3 up master br1 All multicast, including the two IPv6 groups from br0, should now be flooded, according to the policy of br1. But instead the old memberships are still active in the hardware database, causing the switch to only forward traffic to those groups towards the CPU (port 0). Eliminate the race in two steps: 1. Grab the write-side lock of the MDB while generating the replay list. This prevents new memberships from showing up while we are generating the replay list. But it leaves the scenario in which a deferred event was already generated, but not delivered, before we grabbed the lock. Therefore: 2. Make sure that no deferred version of a replay event is already enqueued to the switchdev deferred queue, before adding it to the replay list, when replaying additions.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-53136Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-27058Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-32936Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2026-64029Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-53204Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2025-39726Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-53581Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-1582Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-52578Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2025-38383Same product: Linux Linux Kernel

Affected Assets

linux
linux kernel
6.8 · 5.13 — 6.1.80 · 6.2 — 6.6.19 · 6.7 — 6.7.7

Mitigating Controls

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 (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.

blocks

A.8.25 mandates secure SDLC practices (secure coding guidelines, security requirements, checkpoints, testing including code scans/penetration tests, developer training) that reach race conditions in concurrent code, but only as one slice of a broad requirement whose implementation scope and rigour are left to the organisation.

blocks

A.8.26 explicitly lists resilience against malicious attacks including SQL injections and input validation as application security requirements to identify/address; race conditions are a similar class of timing-based concurrency flaw that can be mitigated by requirements for proper synchronization/locking, but this is only one slice of the broad CWE-362 class (most instances arise in low-level shared-memory or TOCTOU scenarios not named here).

blocks

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.

finds

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

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-362, a class-level weakness, and none of its children carries one either.

References