CVE-2024-53689 (GCVE-0-2024-53689)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-01-11 12:29 – Updated: 2025-02-13 15:26
VLAI?

This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority.

Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "cna": {
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2025-02-13T15:26:42.688Z",
        "orgId": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
        "shortName": "Linux"
      },
      "rejectedReasons": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority."
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
    "assignerShortName": "Linux",
    "cveId": "CVE-2024-53689",
    "datePublished": "2025-01-11T12:29:51.716Z",
    "dateRejected": "2025-02-13T15:26:42.688Z",
    "dateReserved": "2025-01-09T09:50:31.780Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2025-02-13T15:26:42.688Z",
    "state": "REJECTED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.1",
  "vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
    "fkie_nvd": {
      "descriptions": "[{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\\n\\nblock: Fix potential deadlock while freezing queue and acquiring sysfs_lock\\n\\nFor storing a value to a queue attribute, the queue_attr_store function\\nfirst freezes the queue (-\u003eq_usage_counter(io)) and then acquire\\n-\u003esysfs_lock. This seems not correct as the usual ordering should be to\\nacquire -\u003esysfs_lock before freezing the queue. This incorrect ordering\\ncauses the following lockdep splat which we are able to reproduce always\\nsimply by accessing /sys/kernel/debug file using ls command:\\n\\n[   57.597146] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected\\n[   57.597154] 6.12.0-10553-gb86545e02e8c #20 Tainted: G        W\\n[   57.597162] ------------------------------------------------------\\n[   57.597168] ls/4605 is trying to acquire lock:\\n[   57.597176] c00000003eb56710 (\u0026mm-\u003emmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}, at: __might_fault+0x58/0xc0\\n[   57.597200]\\n               but task is already holding lock:\\n[   57.597207] c0000018e27c6810 (\u0026sb-\u003es_type-\u003ei_mutex_key#3){++++}-{4:4}, at: iterate_dir+0x94/0x1d4\\n[   57.597226]\\n               which lock already depends on the new lock.\\n\\n[   57.597233]\\n               the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:\\n[   57.597241]\\n               -\u003e #5 (\u0026sb-\u003es_type-\u003ei_mutex_key#3){++++}-{4:4}:\\n[   57.597255]        down_write+0x6c/0x18c\\n[   57.597264]        start_creating+0xb4/0x24c\\n[   57.597274]        debugfs_create_dir+0x2c/0x1e8\\n[   57.597283]        blk_register_queue+0xec/0x294\\n[   57.597292]        add_disk_fwnode+0x2e4/0x548\\n[   57.597302]        brd_alloc+0x2c8/0x338\\n[   57.597309]        brd_init+0x100/0x178\\n[   57.597317]        do_one_initcall+0x88/0x3e4\\n[   57.597326]        kernel_init_freeable+0x3cc/0x6e0\\n[   57.597334]        kernel_init+0x34/0x1cc\\n[   57.597342]        ret_from_kernel_user_thread+0x14/0x1c\\n[   57.597350]\\n               -\u003e #4 (\u0026q-\u003edebugfs_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}:\\n[   57.597362]        __mutex_lock+0xfc/0x12a0\\n[   57.597370]        blk_register_queue+0xd4/0x294\\n[   57.597379]        add_disk_fwnode+0x2e4/0x548\\n[   57.597388]        brd_alloc+0x2c8/0x338\\n[   57.597395]        brd_init+0x100/0x178\\n[   57.597402]        do_one_initcall+0x88/0x3e4\\n[   57.597410]        kernel_init_freeable+0x3cc/0x6e0\\n[   57.597418]        kernel_init+0x34/0x1cc\\n[   57.597426]        ret_from_kernel_user_thread+0x14/0x1c\\n[   57.597434]\\n               -\u003e #3 (\u0026q-\u003esysfs_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}:\\n[   57.597446]        __mutex_lock+0xfc/0x12a0\\n[   57.597454]        queue_attr_store+0x9c/0x110\\n[   57.597462]        sysfs_kf_write+0x70/0xb0\\n[   57.597471]        kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x1b0/0x2ac\\n[   57.597480]        vfs_write+0x3dc/0x6e8\\n[   57.597488]        ksys_write+0x84/0x140\\n[   57.597495]        system_call_exception+0x130/0x360\\n[   57.597504]        system_call_common+0x160/0x2c4\\n[   57.597516]\\n               -\u003e #2 (\u0026q-\u003eq_usage_counter(io)#21){++++}-{0:0}:\\n[   57.597530]        __submit_bio+0x5ec/0x828\\n[   57.597538]        submit_bio_noacct_nocheck+0x1e4/0x4f0\\n[   57.597547]        iomap_readahead+0x2a0/0x448\\n[   57.597556]        xfs_vm_readahead+0x28/0x3c\\n[   57.597564]        read_pages+0x88/0x41c\\n[   57.597571]        page_cache_ra_unbounded+0x1ac/0x2d8\\n[   57.597580]        filemap_get_pages+0x188/0x984\\n[   57.597588]        filemap_read+0x13c/0x4bc\\n[   57.597596]        xfs_file_buffered_read+0x88/0x17c\\n[   57.597605]        xfs_file_read_iter+0xac/0x158\\n[   57.597614]        vfs_read+0x2d4/0x3b4\\n[   57.597622]        ksys_read+0x84/0x144\\n[   57.597629]        system_call_exception+0x130/0x360\\n[   57.597637]        system_call_common+0x160/0x2c4\\n[   57.597647]\\n               -\u003e #1 (mapping.invalidate_lock#2){++++}-{4:4}:\\n[   57.597661]        down_read+0x6c/0x220\\n[   57.597669]        filemap_fault+0x870/0x100c\\n[   57.597677]        xfs_filemap_fault+0xc4/0x18c\\n[   57.597684]        __do_fault+0x64/0x164\\n[   57.597693]        __handle_mm_fault+0x1274/0x1dac\\n[   57.597702]        handle_mm_fault+0x248/0x48\\n---truncated---\"}]",
      "id": "CVE-2024-53689",
      "lastModified": "2025-01-11T13:15:26.313",
      "published": "2025-01-11T13:15:26.313",
      "references": "[{\"url\": \"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/be26ba96421ab0a8fa2055ccf7db7832a13c44d2\", \"source\": \"416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67\"}, {\"url\": \"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f1a494df8350da2e673618627cb392a8669825dd\", \"source\": \"416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67\"}]",
      "sourceIdentifier": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
      "vulnStatus": "Received"
    },
    "nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2024-53689\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67\",\"published\":\"2025-01-11T13:15:26.313\",\"lastModified\":\"2025-02-13T16:16:29.787\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Rejected\",\"cveTags\":[],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority.\"}],\"metrics\":{},\"references\":[]}}"
  }
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

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.



Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.