CVE-2024-35821
Linux Kernel 2.6.27 – 4.19.312
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-2024-35821 is a medium-severity Missing Release of Resource after Effective Lifetime (CWE-772) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 45th 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.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-35738
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ubifs: Set page uptodate in the correct place Page cache reads are lockless, so setting the freshly allocated page uptodate before we've overwritten it with the data it's supposed to…
more
have in it will allow a simultaneous reader to see old data. Move the call to SetPageUptodate into ubifs_write_end(), which is after we copied the new data into the page.
- 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 can discover missing resource releases through dynamic analysis or stress testing.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate explicit resource-release patterns in code.
Resource-quota allocation limits the blast radius of an unreleased-resource exhaustion 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.
Lifecycle management explicitly requires handling resources through end-of-life including release.
Secure SDLC practices directly prevent missing resource-release defects during development.
Runtime monitoring may surface resource-exhaustion symptoms but does not address release logic.
Capacity monitoring can detect exhaustion caused by unreleased resources but does not prevent the root defect.
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.
Explicit information-deletion requirements directly address timely release of resources after use.
Secure-SDLC practices include resource-management reviews, yet the control covers the entire lifecycle, not just this weakness.
Secure-coding rules can mandate explicit resource-release patterns, but the control is broader than this single weakness.
Change-management processes may catch missing de-allocation during reviews, but the control itself does not target resource lifetime.