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-2024-49882 is a high-severity Double Free (CWE-415) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 24th 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-2024-43582
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: fix double brelse() the buffer of the extents path In ext4_ext_try_to_merge_up(), set path[1].p_bh to NULL after it has been released, otherwise it may be released twice. An example of…
more
what triggers this is as follows: split2 map split1 |--------|-------|--------| ext4_ext_map_blocks ext4_ext_handle_unwritten_extents ext4_split_convert_extents // path->p_depth == 0 ext4_split_extent // 1. do split1 ext4_split_extent_at |ext4_ext_insert_extent | ext4_ext_create_new_leaf | ext4_ext_grow_indepth | le16_add_cpu(&neh->eh_depth, 1) | ext4_find_extent | // return -ENOMEM |// get error and try zeroout |path = ext4_find_extent | path->p_depth = 1 |ext4_ext_try_to_merge | ext4_ext_try_to_merge_up | path->p_depth = 0 | brelse(path[1].p_bh) ---> not set to NULL here |// zeroout success // 2. update path ext4_find_extent // 3. do split2 ext4_split_extent_at ext4_ext_insert_extent ext4_ext_create_new_leaf ext4_ext_grow_indepth le16_add_cpu(&neh->eh_depth, 1) ext4_find_extent path[0].p_bh = NULL; path->p_depth = 1 read_extent_tree_block ---> return err // path[1].p_bh is still the old value ext4_free_ext_path ext4_ext_drop_refs // path->p_depth == 1 brelse(path[1].p_bh) ---> brelse a buffer twice Finally got the following WARRNING when removing the buffer from lru: ============================================ VFS: brelse: Trying to free free buffer WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 72 at fs/buffer.c:1241 __brelse+0x58/0x90 CPU: 2 PID: 72 Comm: kworker/u19:1 Not tainted 6.9.0-dirty #716 RIP: 0010:__brelse+0x58/0x90 Call Trace: <TASK> __find_get_block+0x6e7/0x810 bdev_getblk+0x2b/0x480 __ext4_get_inode_loc+0x48a/0x1240 ext4_get_inode_loc+0xb2/0x150 ext4_reserve_inode_write+0xb7/0x230 __ext4_mark_inode_dirty+0x144/0x6a0 ext4_ext_insert_extent+0x9c8/0x3230 ext4_ext_map_blocks+0xf45/0x2dc0 ext4_map_blocks+0x724/0x1700 ext4_do_writepages+0x12d6/0x2a70 [...] ============================================
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 1 hardening rule · 1 OS baseline
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation explicitly includes dynamic analysis and fuzzing that locate double-free defects before release.
Security engineering principles can require memory-safe allocation patterns or language features that structurally eliminate double-free opportunities.
Flaw remediation processes require identification and correction of memory-management defects such as double free once discovered.
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 prevent double-free errors via static analysis, safe memory APIs, and testing.
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 in development can detect double-free conditions before release.
Secure development life cycle includes memory-safety practices that can prevent double-free bugs.
Application security requirements can mandate memory-safety rules that reduce double-free risk.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles can prescribe safe memory-management patterns.
Secure coding standards directly address proper use of free() and similar functions.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (1 rule)
- V-248590 OL 8 must clear the page allocator to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-415