CVE-2024-47733
Linux Kernel 6.8 – 6.10.13
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-47733 is a medium-severity Missing Release of Resource after Effective Lifetime (CWE-772) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 15th 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
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-42651
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfs: Delete subtree of 'fs/netfs' when netfs module exits In netfs_init() or fscache_proc_init(), we create dentry under 'fs/netfs', but in netfs_exit(), we only delete the proc entry of 'fs/netfs' without…
more
deleting its subtree. This triggers the following WARNING: ================================================================== remove_proc_entry: removing non-empty directory 'fs/netfs', leaking at least 'requests' WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 566 at fs/proc/generic.c:717 remove_proc_entry+0x160/0x1c0 Modules linked in: netfs(-) CPU: 4 UID: 0 PID: 566 Comm: rmmod Not tainted 6.11.0-rc3 #860 RIP: 0010:remove_proc_entry+0x160/0x1c0 Call Trace: <TASK> netfs_exit+0x12/0x620 [netfs] __do_sys_delete_module.isra.0+0x14c/0x2e0 do_syscall_64+0x4b/0x110 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e ================================================================== Therefore use remove_proc_subtree() instead of remove_proc_entry() to fix the above problem.
- 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 missing resource releases through dynamic analysis or stress testing.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate explicit resource-release patterns in code.
Resource-quota allocation limits the blast radius of an unreleased-resource exhaustion 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.
Lifecycle management explicitly requires handling resources through end-of-life including release.
Secure SDLC practices directly prevent missing resource-release defects during development.
Runtime monitoring may surface resource-exhaustion symptoms but does not address release logic.
Capacity monitoring can detect exhaustion caused by unreleased resources but does not prevent the root defect.
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.
Explicit information-deletion requirements directly address timely release of resources after use.
Secure-SDLC practices include resource-management reviews, yet the control covers the entire lifecycle, not just this weakness.
Secure-coding rules can mandate explicit resource-release patterns, but the control is broader than this single weakness.
Change-management processes may catch missing de-allocation during reviews, but the control itself does not target resource lifetime.
Configuration baselines can enforce resource limits or timeouts, indirectly reducing exposure to leaks.