CVE-2024-39486

highpriority · track · 28EPSS 0.002 · 14 %ileDEEURUUS
grimoire priorityP2 · Scheduled
Exploitable?
—
no known exploitation
Likely / severe?
0.23% (14th) EPSS
CVSS 7 · high
Is it mine?
48 products
Check your exposure
Who says so?
4 sources
cnnvd · enisa_euvd · fstec_bdu · cert_bund

EPSS · scored 2026-10-28

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/drm_file: Fix pid refcounting race <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de> filp->pid is supposed to be a refcounted pointer; however, before this patch, drm_file_update_pid() only increments the refcount of a struct pid after storing a pointer to it in filp->pid and dropping the dev->filelist_mutex, making the following race possible: process A process B ========= ========= begin drm_file_update_pid mutex_lock(&dev->filelist_mutex) rcu_replace_pointer(filp->pid, <pid B>, 1) mutex_unlock(&dev->filelist_mutex) begin drm_file_update_pid mutex_lock(&dev->filelist_mutex) rcu_replace_pointer(filp->pid, <pid A>, 1) mutex_unlock(&dev->filelist_mutex) get_pid(<pid A>) synchronize_rcu() put_pid(<pid B>) *** pid B reaches refcount 0 and is freed here *** get_pid(<pid B>) *** UAF *** synchronize_rcu() put_pid(<pid A>) As far as I know, this race can only occur with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU=y because it requires RCU to detect a quiescent state in code that is not explicitly calling into the scheduler. This race leads to use-after-free of a "struct pid". It is probably somewhat hard to hit because process A has to pass through a synchronize_rcu() operation while process B is between mutex_unlock() and get_pid(). Fix it by ensuring that by the time a pointer to the current task's pid is stored in the file, an extra reference to the pid has been taken. This fix also removes the condition for synchronize_rcu(); I think that optimization is unnecessary complexity, since in that case we would usually have bailed out on the lockless check above.

01

cvss

Technical severity, 0–10. One row per scoring source.

7.8
010

base score 0–10 · higher = more severe · hover a vector to decode⚠ sources disagree · medium–high · 6.4–7.8

v3.17highCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:Hprimary · NVD / NIST USexploitability 1 · impact 5.9
v3.17highAV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:Hsecondary · FSTEC (BDU) RU
v3.17.8highCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:Hsecondary · ENISA EU
v3.17.8highCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:Hsecondaryexploitability 1.8 · impact 5.9
v3.16.4mediumCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H/E:Usecondary · CVSS-BT (t0sche)
02

ssvc

A stakeholder decision — act, attend, or track — from exploitation and impact.

Trackcoordinatorcisa_ssvcUS
03

weaknesses

The CWE weakness classes this flaw belongs to.

04

affected products (48)

Products and version ranges known to be affected.

showing 20 of 48
05

advisories (1)

Vendor and ecosystem advisories describing this.

  • WID-SEC-W-2024-1536Linux Kernel: Schwachstelle ermöglicht nicht spezifizierten AngriffDeutsch2024-07-07csaf · cert_bundDE

    Ein lokaler Angreifer kann eine Schwachstelle im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen nicht näher spezifizierten Angriff durchzuführen.

06

also known as (4)

Other names and identifiers for this entity.

07

sources

Which sources assert this record, and when.

published 2024-07-06modified 2026-08-04
09

references (13)

External citations — patches, advisories, analysis.

scry

Attackers weaponise vulnerabilities like this against internet-exposed services. See what is exposed on your perimeter with a free passive scan.

Free scan