CVE-2024-46750
Linux Kernel ≤ 4.19.322
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-2024-46750 is a high-severity Improper Locking (CWE-667) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 13th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-42011
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: PCI: Add missing bridge lock to pci_bus_lock() One of the true positives that the cfg_access_lock lockdep effort identified is this sequence: WARNING: CPU: 14 PID: 1 at drivers/pci/pci.c:4886 pci_bridge_secondary_bus_reset+0x5d/0x70 RIP:…
more
0010:pci_bridge_secondary_bus_reset+0x5d/0x70 Call Trace: <TASK> ? __warn+0x8c/0x190 ? pci_bridge_secondary_bus_reset+0x5d/0x70 ? report_bug+0x1f8/0x200 ? handle_bug+0x3c/0x70 ? exc_invalid_op+0x18/0x70 ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20 ? pci_bridge_secondary_bus_reset+0x5d/0x70 pci_reset_bus+0x1d8/0x270 vmd_probe+0x778/0xa10 pci_device_probe+0x95/0x120 Where pci_reset_bus() users are triggering unlocked secondary bus resets. Ironically pci_bus_reset(), several calls down from pci_reset_bus(), uses pci_bus_lock() before issuing the reset which locks everything *but* the bridge itself. For the same motivation as adding: bridge = pci_upstream_bridge(dev); if (bridge) pci_dev_lock(bridge); to pci_reset_function() for the "bus" and "cxl_bus" reset cases, add pci_dev_lock() for @bus->self to pci_bus_lock(). [bhelgaas: squash in recursive locking deadlock fix from Keith Busch: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240711193650.701834-1-kbusch@meta.com]
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
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 include code reviews, static analysis, and concurrency standards that prevent improper locking.
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 and locking errors before release.
Secure development lifecycle includes concurrency and locking requirements that reduce improper locking defects.
Application security requirements can mandate proper lock acquisition/release patterns.
Secure architecture principles address thread-safety and resource synchronization.
Secure coding standards directly prohibit missing or incorrect lock usage.
Change management may catch locking issues introduced by modifications but does not prevent the weakness itself.