CVE-2024-45025

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fix bitmap corruption on close_range() with CLOSE_RANGE_UNSHARE copy_fd_bitmaps(new, old, count) is expected to copy the first count/BITS_PER_LONG bits from old->full_fds_bits[] and fill the rest with zeroes. What it does is copying enough words (BITS_TO_LONGS(count/BITS_PER_LONG)), then memsets the rest. That works fine, *if* all bits past the cutoff point are clear. Otherwise we are risking garbage from the last word we'd copied. For most of the callers that is true - expand_fdtable() has count equal to old->max_fds, so there's no open descriptors past count, let alone fully occupied words in ->open_fds[], which is what bits in ->full_fds_bits[] correspond to. The other caller (dup_fd()) passes sane_fdtable_size(old_fdt, max_fds), which is the smallest multiple of BITS_PER_LONG that covers all opened descriptors below max_fds. In the common case (copying on fork()) max_fds is ~0U, so all opened descriptors will be below it and we are fine, by the same reasons why the call in expand_fdtable() is safe. Unfortunately, there is a case where max_fds is less than that and where we might, indeed, end up with junk in ->full_fds_bits[] - close_range(from, to, CLOSE_RANGE_UNSHARE) with * descriptor table being currently shared * 'to' being above the current capacity of descriptor table * 'from' being just under some chunk of opened descriptors. In that case we end up with observably wrong behaviour - e.g. spawn a child with CLONE_FILES, get all descriptors in range 0..127 open, then close_range(64, ~0U, CLOSE_RANGE_UNSHARE) and watch dup(0) ending up with descriptor #128, despite #64 being observably not open. The minimally invasive fix would be to deal with that in dup_fd(). If this proves to add measurable overhead, we can go that way, but let's try to fix copy_fd_bitmaps() first. * new helper: bitmap_copy_and_expand(to, from, bits_to_copy, size). * make copy_fd_bitmaps() take the bitmap size in words, rather than bits; it's 'count' argument is always a multiple of BITS_PER_LONG, so we are not losing any information, and that way we can use the same helper for all three bitmaps - compiler will see that count is a multiple of BITS_PER_LONG for the large ones, so it'll generate plain memcpy()+memset(). Reproducer added to tools/testing/selftests/core/close_range_test.c

At a glance

Exploitability

Can be exploited locally on the machine with a low-privilege account. High risk of service disruption.

Exploit odds

0.2% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).

Fix

A patch, advisory or fixed version is referenced. Upgrade or apply it.

Timeline

1. 2024-09-11 16:15 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
2. 2026-06-17 07:53 UTC Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

• Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
• Exploit odds: 0.2% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
• Severity: 5.5 MEDIUM (CVSS).
• Fix: a patch or advisory is linked.

Details

Published

2024-09-11 16:15 UTC

Last modified

2026-06-17 07:53 UTC

Exploit probability

0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days

Weakness

CWE-787 · Out-of-bounds write

Record status

Modified

Affected

• Linux Kernel < 4.19.321
• Linux Kernel < 5.4.283
• Linux Kernel < 5.10.225
• Linux Kernel < 5.15.166
• Linux Kernel < 6.1.107
• Linux Kernel < 6.6.48
• Linux Kernel < 6.10.7
• Linux Kernel 6.11

Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 5.5

Attack vector

Local

Complexity

Low

Privileges needed

Low

User interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

None

Integrity

None

Availability

High

Is it in your code?

Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.

Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2024-45025.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2024-45025. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.

Copy as ticket · More options · Status badge