Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
- EPSS is 0.22% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2024
CVE-2024-26831High confidence
net/handshake: Fix handshake_req_destroy_test1
Linux · Linux
5.5MediumCVSS 3.1
Scheduled
Patch availableMedium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityMedium→Operational priority:Low, lowered one band.downgradedsince 23 May 2026
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Linux Linux and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Distribution package intelligence
4 package statesRelease-specific package status
Debian findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
Repository candidate not checked
A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debian trixietrixie · source | linux | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 6.7.7-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | linux | Not affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0). | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | linux | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 6.7.7-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | linux | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 6.7.7-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
Direct vendor intelligence
1 currentAuthoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories
Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.
CVE-2024-26831 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 63 · interimSUSE Product Security TeamCVE-2024-26831
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
- SLES 15 SP1 CHOST Images for Amazon EC2
- SLES 15 SP2 CHOST Images for Amazon EC2
- SLES 15 SP3 CHOST Images for Amazon EC2
- SLES 15 SP4 CHOST Images for Amazon EC2
- SLES 15 SP5 CHOST Images for Amazon EC2
- SLES 15 SP1 CHOST Images for Google
- SLES 15 SP2 CHOST Images for Google
- SLES 15 SP3 CHOST Images for Google
- SLES 15 SP4 CHOST Images for Google
- SLES 15 SP5 CHOST Images for Google
- SLES 15 SP1 CHOST Images for Microsoft Azure
- SLES 15 SP2 CHOST Images for Microsoft Azure
- Summary
- In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/handshake: Fix handshake_req_destroy_test1 Recently, handshake_req_destroy_test1 started failing: Expected handshake_req_destroy_test == req, but handshake_req_destroy_test == 0000000000000000 req == 0000000060f99b40 not ok 11 req_destroy works This is because "sock_release(sock)" was replaced with "fput(filp)" to address a memory leak. Note that sock_release() is synchronous but fput() usually delays the final close and clean-up. The delay is not consequential in the other cases that were changed but handshake_req_destroy_test1 is testing that handshake_req_cancel() followed by closing the file actually does call the ->hp_destroy method. Thus the PTR_EQ test at the end has to be sure that the final close is complete before it checks the pointer. We cannot use a completion here because if ->hp_destroy is never called (ie, there is an API bug) then the test will hang. Reported by: Guenter Roeck
- Remediation
- To install this SUSE Security Update use the SUSE recommended installation methods like YaST online_update or "zypper patch".
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Patch available01
What, why and how
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/handshake: Fix handshake_req_destroy_test1 Recently, handshake_req_destroy_test1 started failing: Expected handshake_req_destroy_test == req, but handshake_req_destroy_test == 0000000000000000 req == 0000000060f99b40 not ok 11 req_destroy works This is because "sock_release(sock)" was replaced with "fput(filp)" to address a memory leak. Note that sock_release() is synchronous but fput() usually delays the final close and clean-up. The delay is not consequential in the other cases that were changed but handshake_req_destroy_test1 is testing that handshake_req_cancel() followed by closing the file actually does call the ->hp_destroy method. Thus the PTR_EQ test at the end has to be sure that the final close is complete before it checks the pointer. We cannot use a completion here because if ->hp_destroy is never called (ie, there is an API bug) then the test will hang. Reported by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
What
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/handshake: Fix handshake_req_destroy_test1 Recently, handshake_req_destroy_test1 started failing: Expected handshake_req_destroy_test == req, but handshake_req_destroy_test == 0000000000000000 req == 0000000060f99b40 not ok 11 req_destroy works This is because "sock_release(sock)" was replaced with "fput(filp)" to address a memory leak. Note that sock_release() is synchronous but fput() usually delays the final close and clean-up. The delay is not consequential in the other cases that were changed but handshake_req_destroy_test1 is testing that handshake_req_cancel() followed by closing the file actually does call the ->hp_destroy method. Thus the PTR_EQ test at the end has to be sure that the final close is complete before it checks the pointer. We cannot use a completion here because if ->hp_destroy is never called (ie, there is an API bug) then the test will hang. Reported by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Why
The product does not sufficiently track and release allocated memory after it has been used, making the memory unavailable for reallocation and reuse.
How
An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/handshake: Fix handshake_req_destroy_test1 Recently, handshake_req_destroy_test1 started failing: Expected handshake_req_destroy_test == req, but handshake_req_destroy_test == 0000000000000000 req == 0000000060f99b40 not ok 11 req_destroy works This is because "sock_release(sock)" was replaced with "fput(filp)" to address a memory leak. Note that sock_release() is synchronous but fput() usually delays the final close and clean-up. The delay is not consequential in the other cases that were changed but handshake_req_destroy_test1 is testing that handshake_req_cancel() followed by closing the file actually does call the ->hp_destroy method. Thus the PTR_EQ test at the end has to be sure that the final close is complete before it checks the pointer. We cannot use a completion here because if ->hp_destroy is never called (ie, there is an API bug) then the test will hang. Reported by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Why
The product does not sufficiently track and release allocated memory after it has been used, making the memory unavailable for reallocation and reuse.
How
An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- local access → Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Local
- Privileges required
- Low: a basic authenticated account is required
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-401 ↗
CWE-401: Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime. The product does not sufficiently track and release allocated memory after it has been used, making the memory unavailable for reallocation and reuse.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.INoneIntegrity impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- The issue can support a local privilege or sandbox boundary transition; normal system utilities may then be available in the gained context.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Patch available
- Affected
- SLES 15 SP1 CHOST Images for Amazon EC2
- SLES 15 SP2 CHOST Images for Amazon EC2
- SLES 15 SP3 CHOST Images for Amazon EC2
- SLES 15 SP4 CHOST Images for Amazon EC2
- SLES 15 SP5 CHOST Images for Amazon EC2
- SLES 15 SP1 CHOST Images for Google
- SLES 15 SP2 CHOST Images for Google
- SLES 15 SP3 CHOST Images for Google
- SLES 15 SP4 CHOST Images for Google
- SLES 15 SP5 CHOST Images for Google
- SLES 15 SP1 CHOST Images for Microsoft Azure
- SLES 15 SP2 CHOST Images for Microsoft Azure
- SLES 15 SP3 CHOST Images for Microsoft Azure
- SLES 15 SP4 CHOST Images for Microsoft Azure
- SLES 15 SP5 CHOST Images for Microsoft Azure
- Action
- To install this SUSE Security Update use the SUSE recommended installation methods like YaST online_update or "zypper patch".
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 17 Apr 2024 · Last source change 23 May 2026, 15:38 UTC · CWE-401 · Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceNIST NVD
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2024-24093
Product sourceVendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team
CWE sourceNIST NVD
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.