CVE-2024-50182

CVE-2024-50182 is a medium-severity vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel with a CVSS 3.x base score of 5.5. It is not currently listed as actively exploited by CISA, and its EPSS exploit-prediction score is low.

Key facts

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: secretmem: disable memfd_secret() if arch cannot set direct map Return -ENOSYS from memfd_secret() syscall if !can_set_direct_map(). This is the case for example on some arm64 configurations, where marking 4k PTEs in the direct map not present can only be done if the direct map is set up at 4k granularity in the first place (as ARM's break-before-make semantics do not easily allow breaking apart large/gigantic pages). More precisely, on arm64 systems with !can_set_direct_map(), set_direct_map_invalid_noflush() is a no-op, however it returns success (0) instead of an error. This means that memfd_secret will seemingly "work" (e.g. syscall succeeds, you can mmap the fd and fault in pages), but it does not actually achieve its goal of removing its memory from the direct map. Note that with this patch, memfd_secret() will start erroring on systems where can_set_direct_map() returns false (arm64 with CONFIG_RODATA_FULL_DEFAULT_ENABLED=n, CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC=n and CONFIG_KFENCE=n), but that still seems better than the current silent failure. Since CONFIG_RODATA_FULL_DEFAULT_ENABLED defaults to 'y', most arm64 systems actually have a working memfd_secret() and aren't be affected. From going through the iterations of the original memfd_secret patch series, it seems that disabling the syscall in these scenarios was the intended behavior [1] (preferred over having set_direct_map_invalid_noflush return an error as that would result in SIGBUSes at page-fault time), however the check for it got dropped between v16 [2] and v17 [3], when secretmem moved away from CMA allocations. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/ [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/#t [3]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/

Frequently asked questions

What is CVE-2024-50182?
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: secretmem: disable memfd_secret() if arch cannot set direct map Return -ENOSYS from memfd_secret() syscall if !can_set_direct_map(). This is the case for example on some arm64 configurations, where marking 4k PTEs in the direct map not present can only be done if the direct map is set up at 4k granularity in the first place (as ARM's break-before-make semantics do not easily allow breaking apart large/gigantic pages). More precisely, on arm64 systems with !can_set_direct_map(), set_direct_map_invalid_noflush() is a no-op, however it returns success (0) instead of an error. This means that memfd_secret will seemingly "work" (e.g. syscall succeeds, you can mmap the fd and fault in pages), but it does not actually achieve its goal of removing its memory from the direct map. Note that with this patch, memfd_secret() will start erroring on systems where can_set_direct_map() returns false (arm64 with CONFIG_RODATA_FULL_DEFAULT_ENABLED=n, CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC=n and CONFIG_KFENCE=n), but that still seems better than the current silent failure. Since CONFIG_RODATA_FULL_DEFAULT_ENABLED defaults to 'y', most arm64 systems actually have a working memfd_secret() and aren't be affected. From going through the iterations of the original memfd_secret patch series, it seems that disabling the syscall in these scenarios was the intended behavior [1] (preferred over having set_direct_map_invalid_noflush return an error as that would result in SIGBUSes at page-fault time), however the check for it got dropped between v16 [2] and v17 [3], when secretmem moved away from CMA allocations. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/ [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/#t [3]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
How severe is CVE-2024-50182?
CVE-2024-50182 has a CVSS 3.x base score of 5.5, rated medium severity. It is exploitable over local access with low attack complexity, requires low privileges and no user interaction. Impact on confidentiality is none, integrity none, and availability high.
Is CVE-2024-50182 being actively exploited?
It is not currently listed in CISA's KEV catalog. Its EPSS exploit-prediction score is 0% (13th percentile), an estimate of the probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.
What products are affected by CVE-2024-50182?
CVE-2024-50182 primarily affects Linux Linux Kernel. In total, 3 product configurations (CPEs) are listed as vulnerable; see the affected-products list for the exact versions.
How do I fix CVE-2024-50182?
Review the linked vendor and NVD advisories for patched versions and mitigations, then upgrade or apply the recommended workaround.
Does CVE-2024-50182 have an EU (EUVD) identifier?
Yes. CVE-2024-50182 is tracked in the ENISA EU Vulnerability Database (EUVD) as EUVD-2024-44684.
When was CVE-2024-50182 published?
CVE-2024-50182 was published on 2024-11-08 and last updated on 2026-06-17.

References

Affected products (3)

More vulnerabilities in Linux Linux Kernel

All CVEs affecting Linux Linux Kernel →