CVE-2024-35959
Linux Kernel 5.18 – 6.1.87
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-2024-35959 is a medium-severity Incomplete Cleanup (CWE-459) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data from Local System (T1005); ranked at the 17th 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 SI-14 (Non-persistence) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-35677
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/mlx5e: Fix mlx5e_priv_init() cleanup flow When mlx5e_priv_init() fails, the cleanup flow calls mlx5e_selq_cleanup which calls mlx5e_selq_apply() that assures that the `priv->state_lock` is held using lockdep_is_held(). Acquire the state_lock in mlx5e_selq_cleanup().…
more
Kernel log: ============================= WARNING: suspicious RCU usage 6.8.0-rc3_net_next_841a9b5 #1 Not tainted ----------------------------- drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/selq.c:124 suspicious rcu_dereference_protected() usage! other info that might help us debug this: rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1 2 locks held by systemd-modules/293: #0: ffffffffa05067b0 (devices_rwsem){++++}-{3:3}, at: ib_register_client+0x109/0x1b0 [ib_core] #1: ffff8881096c65c0 (&device->client_data_rwsem){++++}-{3:3}, at: add_client_context+0x104/0x1c0 [ib_core] stack backtrace: CPU: 4 PID: 293 Comm: systemd-modules Not tainted 6.8.0-rc3_net_next_841a9b5 #1 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS rel-1.13.0-0-gf21b5a4aeb02-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x8a/0xa0 lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0x154/0x1a0 mlx5e_selq_apply+0x94/0xa0 [mlx5_core] mlx5e_selq_cleanup+0x3a/0x60 [mlx5_core] mlx5e_priv_init+0x2be/0x2f0 [mlx5_core] mlx5_rdma_setup_rn+0x7c/0x1a0 [mlx5_core] rdma_init_netdev+0x4e/0x80 [ib_core] ? mlx5_rdma_netdev_free+0x70/0x70 [mlx5_core] ipoib_intf_init+0x64/0x550 [ib_ipoib] ipoib_intf_alloc+0x4e/0xc0 [ib_ipoib] ipoib_add_one+0xb0/0x360 [ib_ipoib] add_client_context+0x112/0x1c0 [ib_core] ib_register_client+0x166/0x1b0 [ib_core] ? 0xffffffffa0573000 ipoib_init_module+0xeb/0x1a0 [ib_ipoib] do_one_initcall+0x61/0x250 do_init_module+0x8a/0x270 init_module_from_file+0x8b/0xd0 idempotent_init_module+0x17d/0x230 __x64_sys_finit_module+0x61/0xb0 do_syscall_64+0x71/0x140 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0x4e </TASK>
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.4.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover incomplete cleanup through dynamic analysis or resource-leak testing.
Non-persistence mechanisms explicitly initiate resources in a known state and terminate them, directly enforcing cleanup.
Session termination forces explicit release of session-related temporary resources.
Preventing unintended information transfer through shared resources requires complete cleanup of those resources.
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 and coding standards normally require proper resource release and cleanup.
Life-cycle management encompasses disposal of temporary resources but does not specifically target runtime cleanup bugs.
Explicitly calls for removing sensitive data after use, directly addressing one class of incomplete cleanup.
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.
Explicitly requires secure deletion of temporary or residual data, directly addressing incomplete cleanup.
SDLC practices include cleanup steps, yet the weakness can still occur if those steps are omitted.
Secure-coding rules can mandate explicit cleanup of temporary resources, but do not guarantee it.
Change-management processes may require cleanup verification, but the control itself does not address the weakness.