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-2024-42240 is a medium-severity Infinite Loop (CWE-835) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 12th 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-2 (Flaw Remediation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-39463
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: x86/bhi: Avoid warning in #DB handler due to BHI mitigation When BHI mitigation is enabled, if SYSENTER is invoked with the TF flag set then entry_SYSENTER_compat() uses CLEAR_BRANCH_HISTORY and calls…
more
the clear_bhb_loop() before the TF flag is cleared. This causes the #DB handler (exc_debug_kernel()) to issue a warning because single-step is used outside the entry_SYSENTER_compat() function. To address this issue, entry_SYSENTER_compat() should use CLEAR_BRANCH_HISTORY after making sure the TF flag is cleared. The problem can be reproduced with the following sequence: $ cat sysenter_step.c int main() { asm("pushf; pop %ax; bts $8,%ax; push %ax; popf; sysenter"); } $ gcc -o sysenter_step sysenter_step.c $ ./sysenter_step Segmentation fault (core dumped) The program is expected to crash, and the #DB handler will issue a warning. Kernel log: WARNING: CPU: 27 PID: 7000 at arch/x86/kernel/traps.c:1009 exc_debug_kernel+0xd2/0x160 ... RIP: 0010:exc_debug_kernel+0xd2/0x160 ... Call Trace: <#DB> ? show_regs+0x68/0x80 ? __warn+0x8c/0x140 ? exc_debug_kernel+0xd2/0x160 ? report_bug+0x175/0x1a0 ? handle_bug+0x44/0x90 ? exc_invalid_op+0x1c/0x70 ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1f/0x30 ? exc_debug_kernel+0xd2/0x160 exc_debug+0x43/0x50 asm_exc_debug+0x1e/0x40 RIP: 0010:clear_bhb_loop+0x0/0xb0 ... </#DB> <TASK> ? entry_SYSENTER_compat_after_hwframe+0x6e/0x8d </TASK> [ bp: Massage commit message. ]
- 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 unreachable loop exit conditions through static analysis, fuzzing, or execution tracing.
Flaw remediation processes identify and correct infinite-loop defects reported from testing or operations.
Requiring documented development processes and secure coding standards reduces introduction of loops whose termination conditions are unreachable.
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.
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 uncover infinite-loop conditions before release.
Secure development life cycle mandates practices that can detect and prevent infinite-loop defects.
Application security requirements can specify loop-termination rules, indirectly reducing the weakness.
Secure coding standards directly address loop termination and prevent infinite loops.