Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-35977 is a medium-severity Race Condition (CWE-362) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 4.7 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 7th 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-2024-35695
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: platform/chrome: cros_ec_uart: properly fix race condition The cros_ec_uart_probe() function calls devm_serdev_device_open() before it calls serdev_device_set_client_ops(). This can trigger a NULL pointer dereference: BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000 ...…
more
Call Trace: <TASK> ... ? ttyport_receive_buf A simplified version of crashing code is as follows: static inline size_t serdev_controller_receive_buf(struct serdev_controller *ctrl, const u8 *data, size_t count) { struct serdev_device *serdev = ctrl->serdev; if (!serdev || !serdev->ops->receive_buf) // CRASH! return 0; return serdev->ops->receive_buf(serdev, data, count); } It assumes that if SERPORT_ACTIVE is set and serdev exists, serdev->ops will also exist. This conflicts with the existing cros_ec_uart_probe() logic, as it first calls devm_serdev_device_open() (which sets SERPORT_ACTIVE), and only later sets serdev->ops via serdev_device_set_client_ops(). Commit 01f95d42b8f4 ("platform/chrome: cros_ec_uart: fix race condition") attempted to fix a similar race condition, but while doing so, made the window of error for this race condition to happen much wider. Attempt to fix the race condition again, making sure we fully setup before calling devm_serdev_device_open().
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V10.4.2V10.4.5V15.1.3V15.4.1
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.
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 (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 directly require proper synchronization primitives and concurrency testing that prevent race conditions.
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 race conditions, but does not prevent them at design or coding time.
Secure SDLC mandates concurrency controls and synchronization primitives that directly prevent race conditions.
Application security requirements can specify thread-safety and locking rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture principles require proper synchronization and resource isolation, addressing the root cause of CWE-362.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe concurrent access patterns and mandate atomic operations or locks.
Change management reduces introduction of concurrency bugs during updates, yet does not address the weakness itself.