CVE-2024-40912 Detail

CVE-2024-40912

Score / Severity

5.5

Medium

EPSS

0.04%V3

Vector

Local

Published

2024-07-12
12h20 +00:00

Modified

2024-12-19
09h07 +00:00

Official links

CVE.org

NVD

Notifications for a CVE

Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.

Notifications manage

List of Notifications

Notifications for a CVE

Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.

Criteria applied when sending the alert: compared with the last alert sent + differences in CISA, EPSS, CVSS, CWE, Solutions, CPE.

Parameters

You can specify a title that will be retrieved in the alerts that will be sent out.

Specified here a CVE ID as CVE-2025-1234

Planning

Month

Next run calculation

Day

Weekday

Hour

Minute

Creation date

Last execution

Next execution

Functionality requiring a connection

This feature, which allows you to receive alerts, is only active when you are logged into your account.

CVE Descriptions

wifi: mac80211: Fix deadlock in ieee80211_sta_ps_deliver_wakeup()

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: wifi: mac80211: Fix deadlock in ieee80211_sta_ps_deliver_wakeup() The ieee80211_sta_ps_deliver_wakeup() function takes sta->ps_lock to synchronizes with ieee80211_tx_h_unicast_ps_buf() which is called from softirq context. However using only spin_lock() to get sta->ps_lock in ieee80211_sta_ps_deliver_wakeup() does not prevent softirq to execute on this same CPU, to run ieee80211_tx_h_unicast_ps_buf() and try to take this same lock ending in deadlock. Below is an example of rcu stall that arises in such situation. rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU rcu: 2-....: (42413413 ticks this GP) idle=b154/1/0x4000000000000000 softirq=1763/1765 fqs=21206996 rcu: (t=42586894 jiffies g=2057 q=362405 ncpus=4) CPU: 2 PID: 719 Comm: wpa_supplicant Tainted: G W 6.4.0-02158-g1b062f552873 #742 Hardware name: RPT (r1) (DT) pstate: 00000005 (nzcv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) pc : queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x58/0x2d0 lr : invoke_tx_handlers_early+0x5b4/0x5c0 sp : ffff00001ef64660 x29: ffff00001ef64660 x28: ffff000009bc1070 x27: ffff000009bc0ad8 x26: ffff000009bc0900 x25: ffff00001ef647a8 x24: 0000000000000000 x23: ffff000009bc0900 x22: ffff000009bc0900 x21: ffff00000ac0e000 x20: ffff00000a279e00 x19: ffff00001ef646e8 x18: 0000000000000000 x17: ffff800016468000 x16: ffff00001ef608c0 x15: 0010533c93f64f80 x14: 0010395c9faa3946 x13: 0000000000000000 x12: 00000000fa83b2da x11: 000000012edeceea x10: ffff0000010fbe00 x9 : 0000000000895440 x8 : 000000000010533c x7 : ffff00000ad8b740 x6 : ffff00000c350880 x5 : 0000000000000007 x4 : 0000000000000001 x3 : 0000000000000000 x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : 0000000000000001 x0 : ffff00000ac0e0e8 Call trace: queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x58/0x2d0 ieee80211_tx+0x80/0x12c ieee80211_tx_pending+0x110/0x278 tasklet_action_common.constprop.0+0x10c/0x144 tasklet_action+0x20/0x28 _stext+0x11c/0x284 ____do_softirq+0xc/0x14 call_on_irq_stack+0x24/0x34 do_softirq_own_stack+0x18/0x20 do_softirq+0x74/0x7c __local_bh_enable_ip+0xa0/0xa4 _ieee80211_wake_txqs+0x3b0/0x4b8 __ieee80211_wake_queue+0x12c/0x168 ieee80211_add_pending_skbs+0xec/0x138 ieee80211_sta_ps_deliver_wakeup+0x2a4/0x480 ieee80211_mps_sta_status_update.part.0+0xd8/0x11c ieee80211_mps_sta_status_update+0x18/0x24 sta_apply_parameters+0x3bc/0x4c0 ieee80211_change_station+0x1b8/0x2dc nl80211_set_station+0x444/0x49c genl_family_rcv_msg_doit.isra.0+0xa4/0xfc genl_rcv_msg+0x1b0/0x244 netlink_rcv_skb+0x38/0x10c genl_rcv+0x34/0x48 netlink_unicast+0x254/0x2bc netlink_sendmsg+0x190/0x3b4 ____sys_sendmsg+0x1e8/0x218 ___sys_sendmsg+0x68/0x8c __sys_sendmsg+0x44/0x84 __arm64_sys_sendmsg+0x20/0x28 do_el0_svc+0x6c/0xe8 el0_svc+0x14/0x48 el0t_64_sync_handler+0xb0/0xb4 el0t_64_sync+0x14c/0x150 Using spin_lock_bh()/spin_unlock_bh() instead prevents softirq to raise on the same CPU that is holding the lock.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID	Weakness Name	Source
CWE-667	Improper Locking The product does not properly acquire or release a lock on a resource, leading to unexpected resource state changes and behaviors.

Metrics

Metrics	Score	Severity	CVSS Vector	Source
V3.1	5.5	MEDIUM	CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H More informations Base: Exploitabilty Metrics The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component. Attack Vector This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. Local The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Attack Complexity This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. Low Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. Low The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources. User Interaction This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component. None The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user. Base: Scope Metrics The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope. Scope Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs. Unchanged An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority. Base: Impact Metrics The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve. Confidentiality Impact This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. None There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. High There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable). Temporal Metrics The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability. Environmental Metrics These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.	[email protected]

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.

EPSS First.org