CVE-2024-56633 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2024-56633
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress
Analysis In Progress

Attack Complexity Details

  • Attack Complexity:
    Attack Complexity Analysis In Progress
  • Attack Vector:
    Attack Vector Under Analysis
  • Privileges Required: None
    No authentication is required for exploitation.
  • Scope:
    Impact is confined to the initially vulnerable component.
  • User Interaction: None
    No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2024-56633 Details

Status: Received on 27 Dec 2024, 15:15 UTC

Published on: 27 Dec 2024, 15:15 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2024-56633 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2024-56633: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tcp_bpf: Fix the sk_mem_uncharge logic in tcp_bpf_sendmsg The current sk memory accounting logic in __SK_REDIRECT is pre-uncharging tosend bytes, which is either msg->sg.size or a smaller value apply_bytes. Potential problems with this strategy are as follows: - If the actual sent bytes are smaller than tosend, we need to charge some bytes back, as in line 487, which is okay but seems not clean. - When tosend is set to apply_bytes, as in line 417, and (ret < 0), we may miss uncharging (msg->sg.size - apply_bytes) bytes. [...] 415 tosend = msg->sg.size; 416 if (psock->apply_bytes && psock->apply_bytes < tosend) 417 tosend = psock->apply_bytes; [...] 443 sk_msg_return(sk, msg, tosend); 444 release_sock(sk); 446 origsize = msg->sg.size; 447 ret = tcp_bpf_sendmsg_redir(sk_redir, redir_ingress, 448 msg, tosend, flags); 449 sent = origsize - msg->sg.size; [...] 454 lock_sock(sk); 455 if (unlikely(ret < 0)) { 456 int free = sk_msg_free_nocharge(sk, msg); 458 if (!cork) 459 *copied -= free; 460 } [...] 487 if (eval == __SK_REDIRECT) 488 sk_mem_charge(sk, tosend - sent); [...] When running the selftest test_txmsg_redir_wait_sndmem with txmsg_apply, the following warning will be reported: ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: CPU: 6 PID: 57 at net/ipv4/af_inet.c:156 inet_sock_destruct+0x190/0x1a0 Modules linked in: CPU: 6 UID: 0 PID: 57 Comm: kworker/6:0 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc1.bm.1-amd64+ #43 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.12.0-1 04/01/2014 Workqueue: events sk_psock_destroy RIP: 0010:inet_sock_destruct+0x190/0x1a0 RSP: 0018:ffffad0a8021fe08 EFLAGS: 00010206 RAX: 0000000000000011 RBX: ffff9aab4475b900 RCX: ffff9aab481a0800 RDX: 0000000000000303 RSI: 0000000000000011 RDI: ffff9aab4475b900 RBP: ffff9aab4475b990 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffff9aab40050ec0 R10: 0000000000000000 R11: ffff9aae6fdb1d01 R12: ffff9aab49c60400 R13: ffff9aab49c60598 R14: ffff9aab49c60598 R15: dead000000000100 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff9aae6fd80000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007ffec7e47bd8 CR3: 00000001a1a1c004 CR4: 0000000000770ef0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 PKRU: 55555554 Call Trace: <TASK> ? __warn+0x89/0x130 ? inet_sock_destruct+0x190/0x1a0 ? report_bug+0xfc/0x1e0 ? handle_bug+0x5c/0xa0 ? exc_invalid_op+0x17/0x70 ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20 ? inet_sock_destruct+0x190/0x1a0 __sk_destruct+0x25/0x220 sk_psock_destroy+0x2b2/0x310 process_scheduled_works+0xa3/0x3e0 worker_thread+0x117/0x240 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0xcf/0x100 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x31/0x40 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK> ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- In __SK_REDIRECT, a more concise way is delaying the uncharging after sent bytes are finalized, and uncharge this value. When (ret < 0), we shall invoke sk_msg_free. Same thing happens in case __SK_DROP, when tosend is set to apply_bytes, we may miss uncharging (msg->sg.size - apply_bytes) bytes. The same warning will be reported in selftest. [...] 468 case __SK_DROP: 469 default: 470 sk_msg_free_partial(sk, msg, tosend); 471 sk_msg_apply_bytes(psock, tosend); 472 *copied -= (tosend + delta); 473 return -EACCES; [...] So instead of sk_msg_free_partial we can do sk_msg_free here.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2024-56633

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2024-56633 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-2024-56633

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2024-56633.

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-2024-56633, 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-2024-56633, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2024-56633 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2024-56633 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2024-56633 does not affect system availability.

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

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

EPSS Score: 0.044% (probability of exploit)

EPSS Percentile: 12.92% (lower percentile = lower relative risk)
This vulnerability is less risky than approximately 87.08% of others.

CVE-2024-56633 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2024-56633: 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-2025-31203 – An integer overflow was addressed with improved input validation. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.4, tvOS 18.4, iPadOS 17.7.6, macOS Sonoma...
  • CVE-2025-31202 – A null pointer dereference was addressed with improved input validation. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.4 and iPadOS 18.4, macOS Sequoia 15.4, tvOS ...
  • CVE-2025-31197 – The issue was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.4, tvOS 18.4, macOS Ventura 13.7.5, iPadOS 17.7.6, macOS Sono...
  • CVE-2025-30445 – A type confusion issue was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.4, tvOS 18.4, macOS Ventura 13.7.5, iPadOS 17.7....
  • CVE-2025-24271 – An access issue was addressed with improved access restrictions. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.4, tvOS 18.4, macOS Ventura 13.7.5, iPadOS...