Linux Kernel up to 6.11.2 btrfs __counted_by Name buffer overflow

| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 7.7 | $0-$5k | 0.00 |
Summary
A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in Linux Kernel up to 6.11.2. Affected by this vulnerability is the function __counted_by of the component btrfs. This manipulation of the argument Name causes buffer overflow.
The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2024-49869. There is no exploit available.
It is advisable to upgrade the affected component.
Details
A vulnerability was found in Linux Kernel up to 6.11.2. It has been declared as critical. Affected by this vulnerability is the function __counted_by of the component btrfs. The manipulation of the argument name with an unknown input leads to a buffer overflow vulnerability. The CWE definition for the vulnerability is CWE-120. The product copies an input buffer to an output buffer without verifying that the size of the input buffer is less than the size of the output buffer, leading to a buffer overflow. As an impact it is known to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: send: fix buffer overflow detection when copying path to cache entry Starting with commit c0247d289e73 ("btrfs: send: annotate struct name_cache_entry with __counted_by()") we annotated the variable length array "name" from the name_cache_entry structure with __counted_by() to improve overflow detection. However that alone was not correct, because the length of that array does not match the "name_len" field - it matches that plus 1 to include the NUL string terminator, so that makes a fortified kernel think there's an overflow and report a splat like this: strcpy: detected buffer overflow: 20 byte write of buffer size 19 WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 3310 at __fortify_report+0x45/0x50 CPU: 3 UID: 0 PID: 3310 Comm: btrfs Not tainted 6.11.0-prnet #1 Hardware name: CompuLab Ltd. sbc-ihsw/Intense-PC2 (IPC2), BIOS IPC2_3.330.7 X64 03/15/2018 RIP: 0010:__fortify_report+0x45/0x50 Code: 48 8b 34 (...) RSP: 0018:ffff97ebc0d6f650 EFLAGS: 00010246 RAX: 7749924ef60fa600 RBX: ffff8bf5446a521a RCX: 0000000000000027 RDX: 00000000ffffdfff RSI: ffff97ebc0d6f548 RDI: ffff8bf84e7a1cc8 RBP: ffff8bf548574080 R08: ffffffffa8c40e10 R09: 0000000000005ffd R10: 0000000000000004 R11: ffffffffa8c70e10 R12: ffff8bf551eef400 R13: 0000000000000000 R14: 0000000000000013 R15: 00000000000003a8 FS: 00007fae144de8c0(0000) GS:ffff8bf84e780000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007fae14691690 CR3: 00000001027a2003 CR4: 00000000001706f0 Call Trace: ? __warn+0x12a/0x1d0 ? __fortify_report+0x45/0x50 ? report_bug+0x154/0x1c0 ? handle_bug+0x42/0x70 ? exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x50 ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20 ? __fortify_report+0x45/0x50 __fortify_panic+0x9/0x10 __get_cur_name_and_parent+0x3bc/0x3c0 get_cur_path+0x207/0x3b0 send_extent_data+0x709/0x10d0 ? find_parent_nodes+0x22df/0x25d0 ? mas_nomem+0x13/0x90 ? mtree_insert_range+0xa5/0x110 ? btrfs_lru_cache_store+0x5f/0x1e0 ? iterate_extent_inodes+0x52d/0x5a0 process_extent+0xa96/0x11a0 ? __pfx_lookup_backref_cache+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_store_backref_cache+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_iterate_backrefs+0x10/0x10 ? __pfx_check_extent_item+0x10/0x10 changed_cb+0x6fa/0x930 ? tree_advance+0x362/0x390 ? memcmp_extent_buffer+0xd7/0x160 send_subvol+0xf0a/0x1520 btrfs_ioctl_send+0x106b/0x11d0 ? __pfx___clone_root_cmp_sort+0x10/0x10 _btrfs_ioctl_send+0x1ac/0x240 btrfs_ioctl+0x75b/0x850 __se_sys_ioctl+0xca/0x150 do_syscall_64+0x85/0x160 ? __count_memcg_events+0x69/0x100 ? handle_mm_fault+0x1327/0x15c0 ? __se_sys_rt_sigprocmask+0xf1/0x180 ? syscall_exit_to_user_mode+0x75/0xa0 ? do_syscall_64+0x91/0x160 ? do_user_addr_fault+0x21d/0x630 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e RIP: 0033:0x7fae145eeb4f Code: 00 48 89 (...) RSP: 002b:00007ffdf1cb09b0 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010 RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000004 RCX: 00007fae145eeb4f RDX: 00007ffdf1cb0ad0 RSI: 0000000040489426 RDI: 0000000000000004 RBP: 00000000000078fe R08: 00007fae144006c0 R09: 00007ffdf1cb0927 R10: 0000000000000008 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00007ffdf1cb1ce8 R13: 0000000000000003 R14: 000055c499fab2e0 R15: 0000000000000004 Fix this by not storing the NUL string terminator since we don't actually need it for name cache entries, this way "name_len" corresponds to the actual size of the "name" array. This requires marking the "name" array field with __nonstring and using memcpy() instead of strcpy() as recommended by the guidelines at: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/90
The advisory is shared at git.kernel.org. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2024-49869 since 10/21/2024. The exploitation appears to be easy. Technical details are known, but no exploit is available. The price for an exploit might be around USD $0-$5k at the moment (estimation calculated on 01/19/2026).
The vulnerability scanner Nessus provides a plugin with the ID 216493 (Ubuntu 24.10 : Linux kernel vulnerabilities (USN-7276-1)), which helps to determine the existence of the flaw in a target environment.
Upgrading to version 6.11.3 eliminates this vulnerability. Applying the patch 843738ede6cb/96c6ca71572a is able to eliminate this problem. The bugfix is ready for download at git.kernel.org. The best possible mitigation is suggested to be upgrading to the latest version.
The vulnerability is also documented in the databases at Tenable (216493) and CERT Bund (WID-SEC-2024-3251). If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Affected
- Google Container-Optimized OS
- Debian Linux
- Amazon Linux 2
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux
- NetApp StorageGRID
- Ubuntu Linux
- SUSE Linux
- Oracle Linux
- Kyocera Printer
- NetApp AFF
- NetApp ActiveIQ Unified Manager
- SUSE openSUSE
- IBM Security Guardium
- RESF Rocky Linux
- Dell NetWorker
- Dell Avamar
- IBM QRadar SIEM
- NetApp FAS
- SolarWinds Security Event Manager
- Dell PowerProtect Data Domain
- Open Source Linux Kernel
- Dell PowerScale OneFS
Product
Type
Vendor
Name
Version
License
Website
- Vendor: https://www.kernel.org/
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔍VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 7.9VulDB Meta Temp Score: 7.7
VulDB Base Score: 8.0
VulDB Temp Score: 7.6
VulDB Vector: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
NVD Base Score: 7.8
NVD Vector: 🔍
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔍
VulDB Temp Score: 🔍
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Buffer overflowCWE: CWE-120 / CWE-119
CAPEC: 🔍
ATT&CK: 🔍
Physical: Partially
Local: Yes
Remote: Partially
Availability: 🔍
Status: Not defined
EPSS Score: 🔍
EPSS Percentile: 🔍
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔍
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Nessus ID: 216493
Nessus Name: Ubuntu 24.10 : Linux kernel vulnerabilities (USN-7276-1)
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: UpgradeStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔍
Upgrade: Kernel 6.11.3
Patch: 843738ede6cb/96c6ca71572a
Timeline
10/21/2024 🔍10/21/2024 🔍
10/21/2024 🔍
01/19/2026 🔍
Sources
Vendor: kernel.orgAdvisory: 90
Status: Confirmed
CVE: CVE-2024-49869 (🔍)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2024-49869
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-281149
CERT Bund: WID-SEC-2024-3251 - Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen ermöglichen Denial of Service
Entry
Created: 10/21/2024 20:43Updated: 01/19/2026 09:39
Changes: 10/21/2024 20:43 (61), 10/24/2024 03:11 (1), 10/24/2024 23:49 (11), 02/20/2025 14:04 (2), 07/26/2025 06:41 (7), 10/06/2025 02:24 (1), 01/19/2026 09:39 (1)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.