CVE-2024-56613
Linux Kernel 6.4 – 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-2024-56613 is a medium-severity Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime (CWE-401) 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 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-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-53261
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sched/numa: fix memory leak due to the overwritten vma->numab_state [Problem Description] When running the hackbench program of LTP, the following memory leak is reported by kmemleak. # /opt/ltp/testcases/bin/hackbench 20 thread…
more
1000 Running with 20*40 (== 800) tasks. # dmesg | grep kmemleak ... kmemleak: 480 new suspected memory leaks (see /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak) kmemleak: 665 new suspected memory leaks (see /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak) # cat /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak unreferenced object 0xffff888cd8ca2c40 (size 64): comm "hackbench", pid 17142, jiffies 4299780315 hex dump (first 32 bytes): ac 74 49 00 01 00 00 00 4c 84 49 00 01 00 00 00 .tI.....L.I..... 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................ backtrace (crc bff18fd4): [<ffffffff81419a89>] __kmalloc_cache_noprof+0x2f9/0x3f0 [<ffffffff8113f715>] task_numa_work+0x725/0xa00 [<ffffffff8110f878>] task_work_run+0x58/0x90 [<ffffffff81ddd9f8>] syscall_exit_to_user_mode+0x1c8/0x1e0 [<ffffffff81dd78d5>] do_syscall_64+0x85/0x150 [<ffffffff81e0012b>] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e ... This issue can be consistently reproduced on three different servers: * a 448-core server * a 256-core server * a 192-core server [Root Cause] Since multiple threads are created by the hackbench program (along with the command argument 'thread'), a shared vma might be accessed by two or more cores simultaneously. When two or more cores observe that vma->numab_state is NULL at the same time, vma->numab_state will be overwritten. Although current code ensures that only one thread scans the VMAs in a single 'numa_scan_period', there might be a chance for another thread to enter in the next 'numa_scan_period' while we have not gotten till numab_state allocation [1]. Note that the command `/opt/ltp/testcases/bin/hackbench 50 process 1000` cannot the reproduce the issue. It is verified with 200+ test runs. [Solution] Use the cmpxchg atomic operation to ensure that only one thread executes the vma->numab_state assignment. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1794be3c-358c-4cdc-a43d-a1f841d91ef7@amd.com/
- 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 (static analysis, fuzzing, or runtime leak detection) directly finds missing deallocation.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate memory-management disciplines that avoid leaks at introduction.
Engineering principles applied during development can require explicit resource-release patterns that stop memory leaks from being coded.
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 enforce proper memory allocation/deallocation via coding standards, reviews, and tooling.
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 unreleased memory, providing partial coverage of the weakness.
Secure development life cycle mandates memory-management practices that reduce missing-release defects.
Application security requirements can specify explicit memory-release rules, partially mitigating the weakness.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles include resource-management guidelines that address memory leaks.
Secure coding standards directly require proper allocation/deallocation, covering most of this weakness.
Capacity management may detect memory exhaustion symptoms but does not prevent the coding flaw.