Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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-2024-26868 is a high-severity NULL Pointer Dereference (CWE-476) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 47th 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-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-24130
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nfs: fix panic when nfs4_ff_layout_prepare_ds() fails We've been seeing the following panic in production BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000065 PGD 2f485f067 P4D 2f485f067 PUD 2cc5d8067 PMD 0 RIP:…
more
0010:ff_layout_cancel_io+0x3a/0x90 [nfs_layout_flexfiles] Call Trace: <TASK> ? __die+0x78/0xc0 ? page_fault_oops+0x286/0x380 ? __rpc_execute+0x2c3/0x470 [sunrpc] ? rpc_new_task+0x42/0x1c0 [sunrpc] ? exc_page_fault+0x5d/0x110 ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x22/0x30 ? ff_layout_free_layoutreturn+0x110/0x110 [nfs_layout_flexfiles] ? ff_layout_cancel_io+0x3a/0x90 [nfs_layout_flexfiles] ? ff_layout_cancel_io+0x6f/0x90 [nfs_layout_flexfiles] pnfs_mark_matching_lsegs_return+0x1b0/0x360 [nfsv4] pnfs_error_mark_layout_for_return+0x9e/0x110 [nfsv4] ? ff_layout_send_layouterror+0x50/0x160 [nfs_layout_flexfiles] nfs4_ff_layout_prepare_ds+0x11f/0x290 [nfs_layout_flexfiles] ff_layout_pg_init_write+0xf0/0x1f0 [nfs_layout_flexfiles] __nfs_pageio_add_request+0x154/0x6c0 [nfs] nfs_pageio_add_request+0x26b/0x380 [nfs] nfs_do_writepage+0x111/0x1e0 [nfs] nfs_writepages_callback+0xf/0x30 [nfs] write_cache_pages+0x17f/0x380 ? nfs_pageio_init_write+0x50/0x50 [nfs] ? nfs_writepages+0x6d/0x210 [nfs] ? nfs_writepages+0x6d/0x210 [nfs] nfs_writepages+0x125/0x210 [nfs] do_writepages+0x67/0x220 ? generic_perform_write+0x14b/0x210 filemap_fdatawrite_wbc+0x5b/0x80 file_write_and_wait_range+0x6d/0xc0 nfs_file_fsync+0x81/0x170 [nfs] ? nfs_file_mmap+0x60/0x60 [nfs] __x64_sys_fsync+0x53/0x90 do_syscall_64+0x3d/0x90 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0xb0 Inspecting the core with drgn I was able to pull this >>> prog.crashed_thread().stack_trace()[0] #0 at 0xffffffffa079657a (ff_layout_cancel_io+0x3a/0x84) in ff_layout_cancel_io at fs/nfs/flexfilelayout/flexfilelayout.c:2021:27 >>> prog.crashed_thread().stack_trace()[0]['idx'] (u32)1 >>> prog.crashed_thread().stack_trace()[0]['flseg'].mirror_array[1].mirror_ds (struct nfs4_ff_layout_ds *)0xffffffffffffffed This is clear from the stack trace, we call nfs4_ff_layout_prepare_ds() which could error out initializing the mirror_ds, and then we go to clean it all up and our check is only for if (!mirror->mirror_ds). This is inconsistent with the rest of the users of mirror_ds, which have if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(mirror_ds)) to keep from tripping over this exact scenario. Fix this up in ff_layout_cancel_io() to make sure we don't panic when we get an error. I also spot checked all the other instances of checking mirror_ds and we appear to be doing the correct checks everywhere, only unconditionally dereferencing mirror_ds when we know it would be valid.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including static analysis) directly finds null-dereference bugs before deployment.
Documented development standards and tools can enforce null-safety rules and safe pointer usage.
Engineering principles can mandate defensive coding such as explicit null checks before dereference.
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 (static analysis, code review, safe coding standards) directly prevent NULL dereference bugs during development.
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 NULL dereference defects before release.
Secure SDLC mandates defensive coding practices that can prevent NULL dereferences.
Application security requirements can specify input validation and pointer-safety rules.
Secure architecture principles encourage defensive design that avoids unsafe pointer use.
Secure coding standards directly require NULL-pointer checks and safe dereference patterns.