Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-40901

Memory Safety in Linux Kernel 4.10 – 4.19.317

Memory Safety
Published
12 July 2024
Modified
04 August 2026
Patch / advisory
View advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0031 23th percentile
Risk Priority 53 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-40901 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Write (CWE-787) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.3 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 23th 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

Vulnerability Data

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: mpt3sas: Avoid test/set_bit() operating in non-allocated memory There is a potential out-of-bounds access when using test_bit() on a single word. The test_bit() and set_bit() functions operate on long values,…

more

and when testing or setting a single word, they can exceed the word boundary. KASAN detects this issue and produces a dump: BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in _scsih_add_device.constprop.0 (./arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h:60 ./include/asm-generic/bitops/instrumented-atomic.h:29 drivers/scsi/mpt3sas/mpt3sas_scsih.c:7331) mpt3sas Write of size 8 at addr ffff8881d26e3c60 by task kworker/u1536:2/2965 For full log, please look at [1]. Make the allocation at least the size of sizeof(unsigned long) so that set_bit() and test_bit() have sufficient room for read/write operations without overwriting unallocated memory. [1] Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZkNcALr3W3KGYYJG@gmail.com/

CWE(s)
CWE-787

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
attack.mitre.org →
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
attack.mitre.org →
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
attack.mitre.org →
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
attack.mitre.org →
T1211 Exploitation for Stealth Stealth
Adversaries may exploit vulnerabilities to evade detection by hiding activity, suppressing logging, or operating within trusted or unmonitored components.
attack.mitre.org →
T1212 Exploitation for Credential Access Credential Access
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to collect credentials.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-52775Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-42288Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-52868Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-41042Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-42236Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2025-21865Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-56614Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-44938Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2024-50288Same product: Linux Linux Kernel
CVE-2023-52836Same product: Linux Linux Kernel

Affected Assets

linux
linux kernel
6.10 · 4.10 — 4.19.317 · 4.20 — 5.4.279 · 5.5 — 5.10.221

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation good match

Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and bounds checks) finds out-of-bounds write flaws before deployment.

SA-15 Development Process, Standards, and Tools partial match

Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.

SI-10 Information Input Validation partial match

Input validation can structurally reject or sanitize data that would otherwise trigger an out-of-bounds write.

SI-16 Memory Protection partial match

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure-development practices (static analysis, bounds checking, code review) are the primary means of preventing out-of-bounds writes.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover out-of-bounds write flaws so they can be remediated.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

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.

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

Security testing in development and acceptance can detect and prevent out-of-bounds write defects.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates practices that prevent out-of-bounds writes.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
prevents

Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and safe memory handling.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles partial match
prevents

Secure architecture and engineering principles reduce the likelihood of buffer overflows.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
prevents

Secure coding directly addresses out-of-bounds writes through language choice and coding standards.

A.8.32 Change management partial match
prevents

Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.

References