Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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-2024-56788 is a high-severity Race Condition (CWE-362) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); 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 SC-39 (Process Isolation) and SC-4 (Information in Shared System Resources) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-53431
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: ethernet: oa_tc6: fix tx skb race condition between reference pointers There are two skb pointers to manage tx skb's enqueued from n/w stack. waiting_tx_skb pointer points to the tx…
more
skb which needs to be processed and ongoing_tx_skb pointer points to the tx skb which is being processed. SPI thread prepares the tx data chunks from the tx skb pointed by the ongoing_tx_skb pointer. When the tx skb pointed by the ongoing_tx_skb is processed, the tx skb pointed by the waiting_tx_skb is assigned to ongoing_tx_skb and the waiting_tx_skb pointer is assigned with NULL. Whenever there is a new tx skb from n/w stack, it will be assigned to waiting_tx_skb pointer if it is NULL. Enqueuing and processing of a tx skb handled in two different threads. Consider a scenario where the SPI thread processed an ongoing_tx_skb and it moves next tx skb from waiting_tx_skb pointer to ongoing_tx_skb pointer without doing any NULL check. At this time, if the waiting_tx_skb pointer is NULL then ongoing_tx_skb pointer is also assigned with NULL. After that, if a new tx skb is assigned to waiting_tx_skb pointer by the n/w stack and there is a chance to overwrite the tx skb pointer with NULL in the SPI thread. Finally one of the tx skb will be left as unhandled, resulting packet missing and memory leak. - Consider the below scenario where the TXC reported from the previous transfer is 10 and ongoing_tx_skb holds an tx ethernet frame which can be transported in 20 TXCs and waiting_tx_skb is still NULL. tx_credits = 10; /* 21 are filled in the previous transfer */ ongoing_tx_skb = 20; waiting_tx_skb = NULL; /* Still NULL */ - So, (tc6->ongoing_tx_skb || tc6->waiting_tx_skb) becomes true. - After oa_tc6_prepare_spi_tx_buf_for_tx_skbs() ongoing_tx_skb = 10; waiting_tx_skb = NULL; /* Still NULL */ - Perform SPI transfer. - Process SPI rx buffer to get the TXC from footers. - Now let's assume previously filled 21 TXCs are freed so we are good to transport the next remaining 10 tx chunks from ongoing_tx_skb. tx_credits = 21; ongoing_tx_skb = 10; waiting_tx_skb = NULL; - So, (tc6->ongoing_tx_skb || tc6->waiting_tx_skb) becomes true again. - In the oa_tc6_prepare_spi_tx_buf_for_tx_skbs() ongoing_tx_skb = NULL; waiting_tx_skb = NULL; - Now the below bad case might happen, Thread1 (oa_tc6_start_xmit) Thread2 (oa_tc6_spi_thread_handler) --------------------------- ----------------------------------- - if waiting_tx_skb is NULL - if ongoing_tx_skb is NULL - ongoing_tx_skb = waiting_tx_skb - waiting_tx_skb = skb - waiting_tx_skb = NULL ... - ongoing_tx_skb = NULL - if waiting_tx_skb is NULL - waiting_tx_skb = skb To overcome the above issue, protect the moving of tx skb reference from waiting_tx_skb pointer to ongoing_tx_skb pointer and assigning new tx skb to waiting_tx_skb pointer, so that the other thread can't access the waiting_tx_skb pointer until the current thread completes moving the tx skb reference safely.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V10.4.2V10.4.5V15.1.3V15.4.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Maintaining separate execution domains for each process structurally eliminates unintended concurrent access to the same shared resources.
Preventing unintended information transfer through shared system resources directly addresses the improper concurrent modification that defines a race 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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require proper synchronization primitives and concurrency testing that prevent race conditions.
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, but does not prevent them at design or coding time.
Secure SDLC mandates concurrency controls and synchronization primitives that directly prevent race conditions.
Application security requirements can specify thread-safety and locking rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture principles require proper synchronization and resource isolation, addressing the root cause of CWE-362.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe concurrent access patterns and mandate atomic operations or locks.