CVE-2024-48875
Linux Kernel ≤ 6.6.66
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-2024-48875 is a medium-severity Improper Locking (CWE-667) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, ranked at the 4th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-43249
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: don't take dev_replace rwsem on task already holding it Running fstests btrfs/011 with MKFS_OPTIONS="-O rst" to force the usage of the RAID stripe-tree, we get the following splat from…
more
lockdep: BTRFS info (device sdd): dev_replace from /dev/sdd (devid 1) to /dev/sdb started ============================================ WARNING: possible recursive locking detected 6.11.0-rc3-btrfs-for-next #599 Not tainted -------------------------------------------- btrfs/2326 is trying to acquire lock: ffff88810f215c98 (&fs_info->dev_replace.rwsem){++++}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_map_block+0x39f/0x2250 but task is already holding lock: ffff88810f215c98 (&fs_info->dev_replace.rwsem){++++}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_map_block+0x39f/0x2250 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 ---- lock(&fs_info->dev_replace.rwsem); lock(&fs_info->dev_replace.rwsem); *** DEADLOCK *** May be due to missing lock nesting notation 1 lock held by btrfs/2326: #0: ffff88810f215c98 (&fs_info->dev_replace.rwsem){++++}-{3:3}, at: btrfs_map_block+0x39f/0x2250 stack backtrace: CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 2326 Comm: btrfs Not tainted 6.11.0-rc3-btrfs-for-next #599 Hardware name: Bochs Bochs, BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011 Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x5b/0x80 __lock_acquire+0x2798/0x69d0 ? __pfx___lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx___lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 lock_acquire+0x19d/0x4a0 ? btrfs_map_block+0x39f/0x2250 ? __pfx_lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 ? find_held_lock+0x2d/0x110 ? lock_is_held_type+0x8f/0x100 down_read+0x8e/0x440 ? btrfs_map_block+0x39f/0x2250 ? __pfx_down_read+0x10/0x10 ? do_raw_read_unlock+0x44/0x70 ? _raw_read_unlock+0x23/0x40 btrfs_map_block+0x39f/0x2250 ? btrfs_dev_replace_by_ioctl+0xd69/0x1d00 ? btrfs_bio_counter_inc_blocked+0xd9/0x2e0 ? __kasan_slab_alloc+0x6e/0x70 ? __pfx_btrfs_map_block+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_btrfs_bio_counter_inc_blocked+0x10/0x10 ? kmem_cache_alloc_noprof+0x1f2/0x300 ? mempool_alloc_noprof+0xed/0x2b0 btrfs_submit_chunk+0x28d/0x17e0 ? __pfx_btrfs_submit_chunk+0x10/0x10 ? bvec_alloc+0xd7/0x1b0 ? bio_add_folio+0x171/0x270 ? __pfx_bio_add_folio+0x10/0x10 ? __kasan_check_read+0x20/0x20 btrfs_submit_bio+0x37/0x80 read_extent_buffer_pages+0x3df/0x6c0 btrfs_read_extent_buffer+0x13e/0x5f0 read_tree_block+0x81/0xe0 read_block_for_search+0x4bd/0x7a0 ? __pfx_read_block_for_search+0x10/0x10 btrfs_search_slot+0x78d/0x2720 ? __pfx_btrfs_search_slot+0x10/0x10 ? lock_is_held_type+0x8f/0x100 ? kasan_save_track+0x14/0x30 ? __kasan_slab_alloc+0x6e/0x70 ? kmem_cache_alloc_noprof+0x1f2/0x300 btrfs_get_raid_extent_offset+0x181/0x820 ? __pfx_lock_acquire+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_btrfs_get_raid_extent_offset+0x10/0x10 ? down_read+0x194/0x440 ? __pfx_down_read+0x10/0x10 ? do_raw_read_unlock+0x44/0x70 ? _raw_read_unlock+0x23/0x40 btrfs_map_block+0x5b5/0x2250 ? __pfx_btrfs_map_block+0x10/0x10 scrub_submit_initial_read+0x8fe/0x11b0 ? __pfx_scrub_submit_initial_read+0x10/0x10 submit_initial_group_read+0x161/0x3a0 ? lock_release+0x20e/0x710 ? __pfx_submit_initial_group_read+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_lock_release+0x10/0x10 scrub_simple_mirror.isra.0+0x3eb/0x580 scrub_stripe+0xe4d/0x1440 ? lock_release+0x20e/0x710 ? __pfx_scrub_stripe+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_lock_release+0x10/0x10 ? do_raw_read_unlock+0x44/0x70 ? _raw_read_unlock+0x23/0x40 scrub_chunk+0x257/0x4a0 scrub_enumerate_chunks+0x64c/0xf70 ? __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x147/0x5f0 ? __pfx_scrub_enumerate_chunks+0x10/0x10 ? bit_wait_timeout+0xb0/0x170 ? __up_read+0x189/0x700 ? scrub_workers_get+0x231/0x300 ? up_write+0x490/0x4f0 btrfs_scrub_dev+0x52e/0xcd0 ? create_pending_snapshots+0x230/0x250 ? __pfx_btrfs_scrub_dev+0x10/0x10 btrfs_dev_replace_by_ioctl+0xd69/0x1d00 ? lock_acquire+0x19d/0x4a0 ? __pfx_btrfs_dev_replace_by_ioctl+0x10/0x10 ? ---truncated---
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
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.
Secure development lifecycle includes concurrency and locking requirements that reduce improper locking defects.
A.8.26 only requires that security requirements (including resilience against attacks such as buffer overflows or SQL injection) be identified and specified during development or acquisition; it does not itself enforce, implement, or prevent improper locking from being present or exploitable in the resulting application.
Secure architecture principles address thread-safety and resource synchronization.
Secure coding standards directly prohibit missing or incorrect lock usage.
Security testing can detect race conditions and locking errors before release.
Change management may catch locking issues introduced by modifications but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Hardening callouts derived
DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.
- No fine-grained STIG row for CWE-667, a class-level weakness, and none of its children carries one either.