CVE-2024-57975
Linux Kernel ≤ 6.12.13
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-57975 is a high-severity Incomplete Cleanup (CWE-459) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Data from Local System (T1005); ranked at the 12th 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 SI-14 (Non-persistence) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-5272
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: do proper folio cleanup when run_delalloc_nocow() failed [BUG] With CONFIG_DEBUG_VM set, test case generic/476 has some chance to crash with the following VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(): BTRFS error (device dm-3): cow_file_range failed,…
more
start 1146880 end 1253375 len 106496 ret -28 BTRFS error (device dm-3): run_delalloc_nocow failed, start 1146880 end 1253375 len 106496 ret -28 page: refcount:4 mapcount:0 mapping:00000000592787cc index:0x12 pfn:0x10664 aops:btrfs_aops [btrfs] ino:101 dentry name(?):"f1774" flags: 0x2fffff80004028(uptodate|lru|private|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0xfffff) page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_locked(folio)) ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at mm/page-writeback.c:2992! Internal error: Oops - BUG: 00000000f2000800 [#1] SMP CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 3943513 Comm: kworker/u24:15 Tainted: G OE 6.12.0-rc7-custom+ #87 Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE Hardware name: QEMU KVM Virtual Machine, BIOS unknown 2/2/2022 Workqueue: events_unbound btrfs_async_reclaim_data_space [btrfs] pc : folio_clear_dirty_for_io+0x128/0x258 lr : folio_clear_dirty_for_io+0x128/0x258 Call trace: folio_clear_dirty_for_io+0x128/0x258 btrfs_folio_clamp_clear_dirty+0x80/0xd0 [btrfs] __process_folios_contig+0x154/0x268 [btrfs] extent_clear_unlock_delalloc+0x5c/0x80 [btrfs] run_delalloc_nocow+0x5f8/0x760 [btrfs] btrfs_run_delalloc_range+0xa8/0x220 [btrfs] writepage_delalloc+0x230/0x4c8 [btrfs] extent_writepage+0xb8/0x358 [btrfs] extent_write_cache_pages+0x21c/0x4e8 [btrfs] btrfs_writepages+0x94/0x150 [btrfs] do_writepages+0x74/0x190 filemap_fdatawrite_wbc+0x88/0xc8 start_delalloc_inodes+0x178/0x3a8 [btrfs] btrfs_start_delalloc_roots+0x174/0x280 [btrfs] shrink_delalloc+0x114/0x280 [btrfs] flush_space+0x250/0x2f8 [btrfs] btrfs_async_reclaim_data_space+0x180/0x228 [btrfs] process_one_work+0x164/0x408 worker_thread+0x25c/0x388 kthread+0x100/0x118 ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20 Code: 910a8021 a90363f7 a9046bf9 94012379 (d4210000) ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- [CAUSE] The first two lines of extra debug messages show the problem is caused by the error handling of run_delalloc_nocow(). E.g. we have the following dirtied range (4K blocksize 4K page size): 0 16K 32K |//////////////////////////////////////| | Pre-allocated | And the range [0, 16K) has a preallocated extent. - Enter run_delalloc_nocow() for range [0, 16K) Which found range [0, 16K) is preallocated, can do the proper NOCOW write. - Enter fallback_to_fow() for range [16K, 32K) Since the range [16K, 32K) is not backed by preallocated extent, we have to go COW. - cow_file_range() failed for range [16K, 32K) So cow_file_range() will do the clean up by clearing folio dirty, unlock the folios. Now the folios in range [16K, 32K) is unlocked. - Enter extent_clear_unlock_delalloc() from run_delalloc_nocow() Which is called with PAGE_START_WRITEBACK to start page writeback. But folios can only be marked writeback when it's properly locked, thus this triggered the VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(). Furthermore there is another hidden but common bug that run_delalloc_nocow() is not clearing the folio dirty flags in its error handling path. This is the common bug shared between run_delalloc_nocow() and cow_file_range(). [FIX] - Clear folio dirty for range [@start, @cur_offset) Introduce a helper, cleanup_dirty_folios(), which will find and lock the folio in the range, clear the dirty flag and start/end the writeback, with the extra handling for the @locked_folio. - Introduce a helper to clear folio dirty, start and end writeback - Introduce a helper to record the last failed COW range end This is to trace which range we should skip, to avoid double unlocking. - Skip the failed COW range for the e ---truncated---
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.4.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover incomplete cleanup through dynamic analysis or resource-leak testing.
Non-persistence mechanisms explicitly initiate resources in a known state and terminate them, directly enforcing cleanup.
Session termination forces explicit release of session-related temporary resources.
Preventing unintended information transfer through shared resources requires complete cleanup of those resources.
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-development practices and coding standards normally require proper resource release and cleanup.
Life-cycle management encompasses disposal of temporary resources but does not specifically target runtime cleanup bugs.
Explicitly calls for removing sensitive data after use, directly addressing one class of incomplete cleanup.
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.
Explicitly requires secure deletion of temporary or residual data, directly addressing incomplete cleanup.
SDLC practices include cleanup steps, yet the weakness can still occur if those steps are omitted.
Secure-coding rules can mandate explicit cleanup of temporary resources, but do not guarantee it.
Change-management processes may require cleanup verification, but the control itself does not address the weakness.