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-2024-42293 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Read (CWE-125) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data Obfuscation (T1001); ranked at the 10th 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-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-39516
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: arm64: mm: Fix lockless walks with static and dynamic page-table folding Lina reports random oopsen originating from the fast GUP code when 16K pages are used with 4-level page-tables, the…
more
fourth level being folded at runtime due to lack of LPA2. In this configuration, the generic implementation of p4d_offset_lockless() will return a 'p4d_t *' corresponding to the 'pgd_t' allocated on the stack of the caller, gup_fast_pgd_range(). This is normally fine, but when the fourth level of page-table is folded at runtime, pud_offset_lockless() will offset from the address of the 'p4d_t' to calculate the address of the PUD in the same page-table page. This results in a stray stack read when the 'p4d_t' has been allocated on the stack and can send the walker into the weeds. Fix the problem by providing our own definition of p4d_offset_lockless() when CONFIG_PGTABLE_LEVELS <= 4 which returns the real page-table pointer rather than the address of the local stack variable.
- 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 directly finds out-of-bounds read flaws through static analysis, fuzzing, and dynamic bounds checks.
Secure engineering principles require bounds checking and memory-safe constructs that stop out-of-bounds reads from being introduced.
Process isolation confines the effects of an out-of-bounds read to the compromised process.
Input validation rejects malformed indices or lengths that would otherwise cause reads outside buffer bounds.
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.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover instances of out-of-bounds reads after code is deployed.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing out-of-bounds read flaws.
Secure-development practices such as bounds checking and memory-safe languages directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
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.