CVE-2024-57974

MEDIUMNVD 4.74.7
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS score.

Score 4.7 from GitHub Security Advisory published 2025-02-27. NVD baseline CVSS 4.7; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, NVD CVSS v3
Trending — 5 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2025-5275 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-hqjf-7m9j-v4qc (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

4.7EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.2%CVSS: 4.7Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

udp: Deal with race between UDP socket address change and rehash

If a UDP socket changes its local address while it's receiving datagrams, as a result of connect(), there is a period during which a lookup operation might fail to find it, after the address is changed but before the secondary hash (port and address) and the four-tuple hash (local and remote ports and addresses) are updated.

Secondary hash chains were introduced by commit 30fff9231fad ("udp: bind() optimisation") and, as a result, a rehash operation became needed to make a bound socket reachable again after a connect().

This operation was introduced by commit 719f835853a9 ("udp: add rehash on connect()") which isn't however a complete fix: the socket will be found once the rehashing completes, but not while it's pending.

This is noticeable with a socat(1) server in UDP4-LISTEN mode, and a client sending datagrams to it. After the server receives the first datagram (cf. _xioopen_ipdgram_listen()), it issues a connect() to the address of the sender, in order to set up a directed flow.

Now, if the client, running on a different CPU thread, happens to send a (subsequent) datagram while the server's socket changes its address, but is not rehashed yet, this will result in a failed lookup and a port unreachable error delivered to the client, as apparent from the following reproducer:

LEN=$(($(cat /proc/sys/net/core/wmem_default) / 4)) dd if=/dev/urandom bs=1 count=${LEN} of=tmp.in

while :; do taskset -c 1 socat UDP4-LISTEN:1337,null-eof OPEN:tmp.out,create,trunc & sleep 0.1 || sleep 1 taskset -c 2 socat OPEN:tmp.in UDP4:localhost:1337,shut-null wait done

where the client will eventually get ECONNREFUSED on a write() (typically the second or third one of a given iteration):

2024/11/13 21:28:23 socat[46901] E write(6, 0x556db2e3c000, 8192): Connection refused

This issue was first observed as a seldom failure in Podman's tests checking UDP functionality while using pasta(1) to connect the container's network namespace, which leads us to a reproducer with the lookup error resulting in an ICMP packet on a tap device:

LOCAL_ADDR="$(ip -j -4 addr show|jq -rM '.[] | .addr_info[0] | select(.scope == "global").local')"

while :; do ./pasta --config-net -p pasta.pcap -u 1337 socat UDP4-LISTEN:1337,null-eof OPEN:tmp.out,create,trunc & sleep 0.2 || sleep 1 socat OPEN:tmp.in UDP4:${LOCAL_ADDR}:1337,shut-null wait cmp tmp.in tmp.out done

Once this fails:

tmp.in tmp.out differ: char 8193, line 29

we can finally have a look at what's going on:

$ tshark -r pasta.pcap 1 0.000000 :: ? ff02::16 ICMPv6 110 Multicast Listener Report Message v2 2 0.168690 88.198.0.161 ? 88.198.0.164 UDP 8234 60260 ? 1337 Len=8192 3 0.168767 88.198.0.161 ? 88.198.0.164 UDP 8234 60260 ? 1337 Len=8192 4 0.168806 88.198.0.161 ? 88.198.0.164 UDP 8234 60260 ? 1337 Len=8192 5 0.168827 c6:47:05:8d:dc:04 ? Broadcast ARP 42 Who has 88.198.0.161? Tell 88.198.0.164 6 0.168851 9a:55:9a:55:9a:55 ? c6:47:05:8d:dc:04 ARP 42 88.198.0.161 is at 9a:55:9a:55:9a:55 7 0.168875 88.198.0.161 ? 88.198.0.164 UDP 8234 60260 ? 1337 Len=8192 8 0.168896 88.198.0.164 ? 88.198.0.161 ICMP 590 Destination unreachable (Port unreachable) 9 0.168926 88.198.0.161 ? 88.198.0.164 UDP 8234 60260 ? 1337 Len=8192 10 0.168959 88.198.0.161 ? 88.198.0.164 UDP 8234 60260 ? 1337 Len=8192 11 0.168989 88.198.0.161 ? 88.198.0.164 UDP 4138 60260 ? 1337 Len=4096 12 0.169010 88.198.0.161 ? 88.198.0.164 UDP 42 60260 ? 1337 Len=0

On the third datagram received, the network namespace of the container initiates an ARP lookup to deliver the ICMP message.

In another variant of this reproducer, starting the client with:

strace -f pasta --config-net -u 1337 socat UDP4-LISTEN:1337,null-eof OPEN:tmp.out,create,tru ---truncated---

CVSS v3
4.7
EG Score
4.7MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk
21
EG Risk 21/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity47% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 4.7 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.2% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.2%
EPSS %ILE
7th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (4.7): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 4.7 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
4.7 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-29). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

February 27, 2025

Last Modified

October 30, 2026

Patch Availability(15)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
ubuntulinux-virtual-6.8 (6.8.0-64.67) @ noble2026-10-30ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-raspi-realtime-6.8 (6.8.0-2026.27) @ noble2026-10-30ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-raspi-6.8 (6.8.0-1031.35) @ noble2026-10-30ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-azure-nvidia-lts-24.04 (6.8.0-1022.23) @ noble2026-10-30ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-gcp-edge (6.8.0-1033.35~22.04.1) @ jammy2026-10-30ubuntu
ubuntulinux-virtual-hwe-24.04-edge (6.11.0-26.26) @ oracular2026-10-30ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-realtime-6.8.1 (6.8.1-1025.26) @ noble2026-10-30ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-lowlatency-hwe-20.04-edge (6.8.0-64.67.1) @ noble2026-10-30ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-oracle-lts-24.04 (6.8.0-1029.30) @ noble2026-10-30ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-aws (6.11.0-1014.15) @ oracular2026-10-30ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-oracle-64k (6.11.0-1016.17) @ oracular2026-10-30ubuntu
ubuntulinux-virtual-hwe-22.04-edge (6.8.0-64.67~22.04.1) @ jammy2026-10-30ubuntu
redhatkernel-0:5.14.0-687.61.1.el9_82026-10-26redhat
linuxKernel @ 6.12.13 (fixes >=2.6.33)—osv
linuxKernel @ 6.6.160 (fixes >=2.6.33)—osv

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(4 across 4 ecosystems)
Debian:11(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux5.10.103-1 ... 7.2~rc5-1~exp1 (496 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.1.106-1 ... 7.2~rc7-1~exp1 (353 versions)
  • every version on: no fix on record
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux—
  • every version up to 6.12.13-1: fixed in 6.12.13-1
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux—
  • every version up to 6.12.13-1: fixed in 6.12.13-1
—

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Additional Vendor Advisories

(12)

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 13× in last 7d / 46× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 95 of 202 refreshes on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. 5 repeat rows among the latest 100 are merged into the row they repeat. The 107 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-02 16:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  2. 2026-11-01 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  3. 2026-10-31 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  4. 2026-10-30 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  5. 2026-10-30 13:34 UTCVendor advisory
  6. 2026-10-30 13:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-hqjf-7m9j-v4qc · GitHub CVSS 4.7
  7. 2026-10-30 12:31 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-30 12:31 UTCVendor advisory
  9. 2026-10-30 12:31 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-hqjf-7m9j-v4qc · GitHub CVSS 4.7
  10. 2026-10-29 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  11. 2026-10-29 07:55 UTCOSV refresh
  12. 2026-10-28 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  13. 2026-10-27 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  14. 2026-10-26 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  15. 2026-10-25 16:54 UTCEG score recompute
  16. 2026-10-25 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 7th percentile
  17. 2026-10-24 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  18. 2026-10-23 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  19. 2026-10-22 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  20. 2026-10-21 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  21. 2026-10-21 13:55 UTCVendor advisory
  22. 2026-10-21 13:54 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-hqjf-7m9j-v4qc · GitHub CVSS 4.7
  23. 2026-10-21 13:01 UTCVendor advisory
  24. 2026-10-21 13:01 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-hqjf-7m9j-v4qc · GitHub CVSS 4.7
  25. 2026-10-21 12:32 UTCEG score recompute
Show 70 more
  1. 2026-10-21 12:32 UTCVendor advisory
  2. 2026-10-21 12:32 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-hqjf-7m9j-v4qc · GitHub CVSS 4.7
  3. 2026-10-20 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  4. 2026-10-19 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  5. 2026-10-18 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  6. 2026-10-18 05:57 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-17 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  8. 2026-10-16 16:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  9. 2026-10-15 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  10. 2026-10-14 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  11. 2026-10-13 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  12. 2026-10-12 17:36 UTCEG score recompute
  13. 2026-10-11 21:02 UTCEG score recompute
  14. 2026-10-11 15:54 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-10 19:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  16. 2026-10-09 20:05 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  17. 2026-10-08 17:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  18. 2026-10-07 23:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  19. 2026-10-06 15:16 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  20. 2026-10-05 17:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  21. 2026-10-04 23:20 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  22. 2026-10-03 14:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  23. 2026-10-02 22:10 UTCOSV refresh
  24. 2026-10-02 16:26 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-10-01 19:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  26. 2026-09-30 15:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  27. 2026-09-28 13:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  28. 2026-09-27 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  29. 2026-09-26 15:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  30. 2026-09-24 14:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  31. 2026-09-23 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  32. 2026-09-22 14:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  33. 2026-09-20 20:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  34. 2026-09-18 19:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  35. 2026-09-16 14:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  36. 2026-09-16 05:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  37. 2026-09-15 03:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  38. 2026-09-13 19:24 UTCOSV refresh
  39. 2026-09-13 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  40. 2026-09-12 14:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  41. 2026-09-11 14:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  42. 2026-09-11 09:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  43. 2026-09-10 09:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  44. 2026-09-08 21:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  45. 2026-09-07 16:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  46. 2026-09-06 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  47. 2026-09-04 05:05 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  48. 2026-09-02 14:10 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  49. 2026-09-01 13:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  50. 2026-08-30 19:16 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  51. 2026-08-30 01:21 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  52. 2026-08-28 21:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  53. 2026-08-27 14:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  54. 2026-08-26 14:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  55. 2026-08-25 20:40 UTCOSV refresh
  56. 2026-08-25 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  57. 2026-08-24 14:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  58. 2026-08-23 00:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  59. 2026-08-21 23:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  60. 2026-08-20 22:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  61. 2026-08-19 17:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  62. 2026-08-18 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  63. 2026-08-17 13:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  64. 2026-08-16 14:55 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  65. 2026-08-16 02:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  66. 2026-08-15 01:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  67. 2026-08-13 21:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  68. 2026-08-12 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  69. 2026-08-11 13:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile
  70. 2026-08-10 23:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 4th percentile

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2024-57974?
CVE-2024-57974 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on February 27, 2025. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: udp: Deal with race between UDP socket address change and rehash If a UDP socket changes its local address while it's receiving datagrams, as a result of connect(), there is a period during which a lookup operation might fail to…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2024-57974 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2024-57974 was published on February 27, 2025. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 30, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2024-57974 actively exploited?
CVE-2024-57974 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (7th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2024-57974?
CVE-2024-57974 has a CVSS v3 base score of 4.7 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2024-57974?
A fix for CVE-2024-57974 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2024-57974 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2024-57974

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2024-57974?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.