GCVE Workshop - 22 September 2026 (14:00-18:00), Luxembourg Before The Vulnopticon Conference - Registration

GHSA-MFW6-959V-265J

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-09-11 18:31 – Updated: 2025-11-04 00:31
VLAI
Details

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

mptcp: pm: only mark 'subflow' endp as available

Adding the following warning ...

WARN_ON_ONCE(msk->pm.local_addr_used == 0)

... before decrementing the local_addr_used counter helped to find a bug when running the "remove single address" subtest from the mptcp_join.sh selftests.

Removing a 'signal' endpoint will trigger the removal of all subflows linked to this endpoint via mptcp_pm_nl_rm_addr_or_subflow() with rm_type == MPTCP_MIB_RMSUBFLOW. This will decrement the local_addr_used counter, which is wrong in this case because this counter is linked to 'subflow' endpoints, and here it is a 'signal' endpoint that is being removed.

Now, the counter is decremented, only if the ID is being used outside of mptcp_pm_nl_rm_addr_or_subflow(), only for 'subflow' endpoints, and if the ID is not 0 -- local_addr_used is not taking into account these ones. This marking of the ID as being available, and the decrement is done no matter if a subflow using this ID is currently available, because the subflow could have been closed before.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-45010"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2024-09-11T16:15:06Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nmptcp: pm: only mark \u0027subflow\u0027 endp as available\n\nAdding the following warning ...\n\n  WARN_ON_ONCE(msk-\u003epm.local_addr_used == 0)\n\n... before decrementing the local_addr_used counter helped to find a bug\nwhen running the \"remove single address\" subtest from the mptcp_join.sh\nselftests.\n\nRemoving a \u0027signal\u0027 endpoint will trigger the removal of all subflows\nlinked to this endpoint via mptcp_pm_nl_rm_addr_or_subflow() with\nrm_type == MPTCP_MIB_RMSUBFLOW. This will decrement the local_addr_used\ncounter, which is wrong in this case because this counter is linked to\n\u0027subflow\u0027 endpoints, and here it is a \u0027signal\u0027 endpoint that is being\nremoved.\n\nNow, the counter is decremented, only if the ID is being used outside\nof mptcp_pm_nl_rm_addr_or_subflow(), only for \u0027subflow\u0027 endpoints, and\nif the ID is not 0 -- local_addr_used is not taking into account these\nones. This marking of the ID as being available, and the decrement is\ndone no matter if a subflow using this ID is currently available,\nbecause the subflow could have been closed before.",
  "id": "GHSA-mfw6-959v-265j",
  "modified": "2025-11-04T00:31:23Z",
  "published": "2024-09-11T18:31:05Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-45010"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/322ea3778965da72862cca2a0c50253aacf65fe6"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/43cf912b0b0fc7b4fd12cbc735d1f5afb8e1322d"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/7fdc870d08960961408a44c569f20f50940e7d4f"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/9849cfc67383ceb167155186f8f8fe8a896b60b3"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2025/01/msg00001.html"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…

Related by attack behaviour

Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.


Loading…