Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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-2024-35911 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Write (CWE-787) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 13th 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-2024-35629
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ice: fix memory corruption bug with suspend and rebuild The ice driver would previously panic after suspend. This is caused from the driver *only* calling the ice_vsi_free_q_vectors() function by itself,…
more
when it is suspending. Since commit b3e7b3a6ee92 ("ice: prevent NULL pointer deref during reload") the driver has zeroed out num_q_vectors, and only restored it in ice_vsi_cfg_def(). This further causes the ice_rebuild() function to allocate a zero length buffer, after which num_q_vectors is updated, and then the new value of num_q_vectors is used to index into the zero length buffer, which corrupts memory. The fix entails making sure all the code referencing num_q_vectors only does so after it has been reset via ice_vsi_cfg_def(). I didn't perform a full bisect, but I was able to test against 6.1.77 kernel and that ice driver works fine for suspend/resume with no panic, so sometime since then, this problem was introduced. Also clean up an un-needed init of a local variable in the function being modified. PANIC from 6.8.0-rc1: [1026674.915596] PM: suspend exit [1026675.664697] ice 0000:17:00.1: PTP reset successful [1026675.664707] ice 0000:17:00.1: 2755 msecs passed between update to cached PHC time [1026675.667660] ice 0000:b1:00.0: PTP reset successful [1026675.675944] ice 0000:b1:00.0: 2832 msecs passed between update to cached PHC time [1026677.137733] ixgbe 0000:31:00.0 ens787: NIC Link is Up 1 Gbps, Flow Control: None [1026677.190201] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000010 [1026677.192753] ice 0000:17:00.0: PTP reset successful [1026677.192764] ice 0000:17:00.0: 4548 msecs passed between update to cached PHC time [1026677.197928] #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode [1026677.197933] #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page [1026677.197937] PGD 1557a7067 P4D 0 [1026677.212133] ice 0000:b1:00.1: PTP reset successful [1026677.212143] ice 0000:b1:00.1: 4344 msecs passed between update to cached PHC time [1026677.212575] [1026677.243142] Oops: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI [1026677.247918] CPU: 23 PID: 42790 Comm: kworker/23:0 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G W 6.8.0-rc1+ #1 [1026677.257989] Hardware name: Intel Corporation M50CYP2SBSTD/M50CYP2SBSTD, BIOS SE5C620.86B.01.01.0005.2202160810 02/16/2022 [1026677.269367] Workqueue: ice ice_service_task [ice] [1026677.274592] RIP: 0010:ice_vsi_rebuild_set_coalesce+0x130/0x1e0 [ice] [1026677.281421] Code: 0f 84 3a ff ff ff 41 0f b7 74 ec 02 66 89 b0 22 02 00 00 81 e6 ff 1f 00 00 e8 ec fd ff ff e9 35 ff ff ff 48 8b 43 30 49 63 ed <41> 0f b7 34 24 41 83 c5 01 48 8b 3c e8 66 89 b7 aa 02 00 00 81 e6 [1026677.300877] RSP: 0018:ff3be62a6399bcc0 EFLAGS: 00010202 [1026677.306556] RAX: ff28691e28980828 RBX: ff28691e41099828 RCX: 0000000000188000 [1026677.314148] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000010 RDI: ff28691e41099828 [1026677.321730] RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 [1026677.329311] R10: 0000000000000007 R11: ffffffffffffffc0 R12: 0000000000000010 [1026677.336896] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: ff28691e0eaa81a0 [1026677.344472] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ff28693cbffc0000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [1026677.353000] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [1026677.359195] CR2: 0000000000000010 CR3: 0000000128df4001 CR4: 0000000000771ef0 [1026677.366779] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 [1026677.374369] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 [1026677.381952] PKRU: 55555554 [1026677.385116] Call Trace: [1026677.388023] <TASK> [1026677.390589] ? __die+0x20/0x70 [1026677.394105] ? page_fault_oops+0x82/0x160 [1026677.398576] ? do_user_addr_fault+0x65/0x6a0 [1026677.403307] ? exc_page_fault+0x6a/0x150 [1026677.407694] ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x22/0x30 [1026677.412349] ? ice_vsi_rebuild_set_coalesce+0x130/0x1e0 [ice] [1026677.4186 ---truncated---
- 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 fuzzing and bounds checks) finds out-of-bounds write flaws before deployment.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Input validation can structurally reject or sanitize data that would otherwise trigger an out-of-bounds write.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the exploitability and blast radius of a successful out-of-bounds write.
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-development practices (static analysis, bounds checking, code review) are the primary means of preventing out-of-bounds writes.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover out-of-bounds write flaws so they can be remediated.
Patching or replacing vulnerable software directly eliminates known instances of this coding weakness.
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 in development and acceptance can detect and prevent out-of-bounds write defects.
Secure development life cycle mandates practices that prevent out-of-bounds writes.
Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and safe memory handling.
Secure architecture and engineering principles reduce the likelihood of buffer overflows.
Secure coding directly addresses out-of-bounds writes through language choice and coding standards.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.