CVE-2024-26732 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2024-26732
Vulnerability Scoring

5.5
/10
Significant Risk

Security assessments indicate that CVE-2024-26732 presents a notable risk, potentially requiring prompt mitigation.

Attack Complexity Details

  • Attack Complexity: Low
    Exploits can be performed without significant complexity or special conditions.
  • Attack Vector: Local
    Vulnerability requires local system access.
  • Privileges Required: Low
    Some privileges are necessary to exploit the vulnerability.
  • Scope: Unchanged
    Exploit remains within the originally vulnerable component.
  • User Interaction: None
    No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2024-26732 Details

Status: Analyzed

Last updated: 🕓 03 Feb 2025, 16:17 UTC
Originally published on: 🕔 03 Apr 2024, 17:15 UTC

Time between publication and last update: 305 days

CVSS Release: version 3

CVSS3 Source

nvd@nist.gov

CVSS3 Type

Primary

CVSS3 Vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

CVE-2024-26732 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2024-26732: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: implement lockless setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF) syzbot reported a lockdep violation [1] involving af_unix support of SO_PEEK_OFF. Since SO_PEEK_OFF is inherently not thread safe (it uses a per-socket sk_peek_off field), there is really no point to enforce a pointless thread safety in the kernel. After this patch : - setsockopt(SO_PEEK_OFF) no longer acquires the socket lock. - skb_consume_udp() no longer has to acquire the socket lock. - af_unix no longer needs a special version of sk_set_peek_off(), because it does not lock u->iolock anymore. As a followup, we could replace prot->set_peek_off to be a boolean and avoid an indirect call, since we always use sk_set_peek_off(). [1] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 6.8.0-rc4-syzkaller-00267-g0f1dd5e91e2b #0 Not tainted syz-executor.2/30025 is trying to acquire lock: ffff8880765e7d80 (&u->iolock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: unix_set_peek_off+0x26/0xa0 net/unix/af_unix.c:789 but task is already holding lock: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline] ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sockopt_lock_sock net/core/sock.c:1060 [inline] ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sk_setsockopt+0xe52/0x3360 net/core/sock.c:1193 which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #1 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}: lock_acquire+0x1e3/0x530 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754 lock_sock_nested+0x48/0x100 net/core/sock.c:3524 lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline] __unix_dgram_recvmsg+0x1275/0x12c0 net/unix/af_unix.c:2415 sock_recvmsg_nosec+0x18e/0x1d0 net/socket.c:1046 ____sys_recvmsg+0x3c0/0x470 net/socket.c:2801 ___sys_recvmsg net/socket.c:2845 [inline] do_recvmmsg+0x474/0xae0 net/socket.c:2939 __sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3018 [inline] __do_sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3041 [inline] __se_sys_recvmmsg net/socket.c:3034 [inline] __x64_sys_recvmmsg+0x199/0x250 net/socket.c:3034 do_syscall_64+0xf9/0x240 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6f/0x77 -> #0 (&u->iolock){+.+.}-{3:3}: check_prev_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3134 [inline] check_prevs_add kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3253 [inline] validate_chain+0x18ca/0x58e0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:3869 __lock_acquire+0x1345/0x1fd0 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5137 lock_acquire+0x1e3/0x530 kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5754 __mutex_lock_common kernel/locking/mutex.c:608 [inline] __mutex_lock+0x136/0xd70 kernel/locking/mutex.c:752 unix_set_peek_off+0x26/0xa0 net/unix/af_unix.c:789 sk_setsockopt+0x207e/0x3360 do_sock_setsockopt+0x2fb/0x720 net/socket.c:2307 __sys_setsockopt+0x1ad/0x250 net/socket.c:2334 __do_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2343 [inline] __se_sys_setsockopt net/socket.c:2340 [inline] __x64_sys_setsockopt+0xb5/0xd0 net/socket.c:2340 do_syscall_64+0xf9/0x240 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6f/0x77 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(sk_lock-AF_UNIX); lock(&u->iolock); lock(sk_lock-AF_UNIX); lock(&u->iolock); *** DEADLOCK *** 1 lock held by syz-executor.2/30025: #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: lock_sock include/net/sock.h:1691 [inline] #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sockopt_lock_sock net/core/sock.c:1060 [inline] #0: ffff8880765e7930 (sk_lock-AF_UNIX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: sk_setsockopt+0xe52/0x3360 net/core/sock.c:1193 stack backtrace: CPU: 0 PID: 30025 Comm: syz-executor.2 Not tainted 6.8.0-rc4-syzkaller-00267-g0f1dd5e91e2b #0 Hardware name: Google Google C ---truncated---

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2024-26732

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2024-26732 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2024-26732

CVE-2024-26732 presents an accessible attack vector with minimal effort required. Restricting access controls and implementing security updates are critical to reducing exploitation risks.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2024-26732, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2024-26732, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2024-26732 has no significant impact on data confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2024-26732 poses no threat to data integrity.
  • Availability: High
    CVE-2024-26732 can disrupt system operations, potentially causing complete denial of service (DoS).

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

The EPSS score estimates the probability that this vulnerability will be exploited in the near future.

EPSS Score: 0.043% (probability of exploit)

EPSS Percentile: 12.0% (lower percentile = lower relative risk)
This vulnerability is less risky than approximately 88.0% of others.

CVE-2024-26732 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-667

CAPEC Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification

  • Forced Deadlock CAPEC-25 The adversary triggers and exploits a deadlock condition in the target software to cause a denial of service. A deadlock can occur when two or more competing actions are waiting for each other to finish, and thus neither ever does. Deadlock conditions can be difficult to detect.
  • Leveraging Race Conditions CAPEC-26 The adversary targets a race condition occurring when multiple processes access and manipulate the same resource concurrently, and the outcome of the execution depends on the particular order in which the access takes place. The adversary can leverage a race condition by "running the race", modifying the resource and modifying the normal execution flow. For instance, a race condition can occur while accessing a file: the adversary can trick the system by replacing the original file with their version and cause the system to read the malicious file.
  • Leveraging Race Conditions via Symbolic Links CAPEC-27 This attack leverages the use of symbolic links (Symlinks) in order to write to sensitive files. An attacker can create a Symlink link to a target file not otherwise accessible to them. When the privileged program tries to create a temporary file with the same name as the Symlink link, it will actually write to the target file pointed to by the attackers' Symlink link. If the attacker can insert malicious content in the temporary file they will be writing to the sensitive file by using the Symlink. The race occurs because the system checks if the temporary file exists, then creates the file. The attacker would typically create the Symlink during the interval between the check and the creation of the temporary file.

Vulnerable Configurations

  • cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7:-:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7:-:*:*:*:*:*:*
  • cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7.1:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
  • cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7.2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7.2:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
  • cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7.3:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7.3:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
  • cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7.4:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7.4:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
  • cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7.5:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7.5:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
  • cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7.6:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.7.6:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
  • cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.8:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.8:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:*
  • cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.8:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.8:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:*
  • cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.8:rc3:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.8:rc3:*:*:*:*:*:*
  • cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.8:rc4:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.8:rc4:*:*:*:*:*:*
  • cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.8:rc5:*:*:*:*:*:*
    cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.8:rc5:*:*:*:*:*:*

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2024-26732: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

  • CVE-2025-4250 – A vulnerability was found in code-projects Nero Social Networking Site 1.0. It has been classified as critical. This affects an unknown part of the...
  • CVE-2025-4249 – A vulnerability was found in PHPGurukul e-Diary Management System 1.0 and classified as critical. Affected by this issue is some unknown functional...
  • CVE-2025-4248 – A vulnerability has been found in SourceCodester Simple To-Do List System 1.0 and classified as critical. Affected by this vulnerability is an unkn...
  • CVE-2025-4247 – A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, was found in SourceCodester Simple To-Do List System 1.0. Affected is an unknown function of the...
  • CVE-2025-47245 – In BlueWave Checkmate through 2.0.2 before d4a6072, an invite request can be modified to specify a privileged role.