ghsa-5ggj-xwvc-9x57
Vulnerability from github
Published
2024-11-19 18:31
Modified
2024-11-22 21:32
Severity ?
Details
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
drm/mediatek: Fix potential NULL dereference in mtk_crtc_destroy()
In mtk_crtc_create(), if the call to mbox_request_channel() fails then we set the "mtk_crtc->cmdq_client.chan" pointer to NULL. In that situation, we do not call cmdq_pkt_create().
During the cleanup, we need to check if the "mtk_crtc->cmdq_client.chan" is NULL first before calling cmdq_pkt_destroy(). Calling cmdq_pkt_destroy() is unnecessary if we didn't call cmdq_pkt_create() and it will result in a NULL pointer dereference.
{ "affected": [], "aliases": [ "CVE-2024-53056" ], "database_specific": { "cwe_ids": [ "CWE-476" ], "github_reviewed": false, "github_reviewed_at": null, "nvd_published_at": "2024-11-19T18:15:25Z", "severity": "MODERATE" }, "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\ndrm/mediatek: Fix potential NULL dereference in mtk_crtc_destroy()\n\nIn mtk_crtc_create(), if the call to mbox_request_channel() fails then we\nset the \"mtk_crtc-\u003ecmdq_client.chan\" pointer to NULL. In that situation,\nwe do not call cmdq_pkt_create().\n\nDuring the cleanup, we need to check if the \"mtk_crtc-\u003ecmdq_client.chan\"\nis NULL first before calling cmdq_pkt_destroy(). Calling\ncmdq_pkt_destroy() is unnecessary if we didn\u0027t call cmdq_pkt_create() and\nit will result in a NULL pointer dereference.", "id": "GHSA-5ggj-xwvc-9x57", "modified": "2024-11-22T21:32:13Z", "published": "2024-11-19T18:31:06Z", "references": [ { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-53056" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4018651ba5c409034149f297d3dd3328b91561fd" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c60583a87cb4a85b69d1f448f0be5eb6ec62cbb2" } ], "schema_version": "1.4.0", "severity": [ { "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H", "type": "CVSS_V3" } ] }
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
Author | Source | Type | Date |
---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.