CVE-2024-41067

MEDIUM
Published Jul 29, 2024 Modified Oct 9, 2025

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: scrub: handle RST lookup error correctly [BUG] When running btrfs/060 with forced RST feature, it would crash the following ASSERT() inside scrub_read_endio(): ASSERT(sector_nr < stripe->nr_sectors); Before that, we would have tree dump from btrfs_get_raid_extent_offset(), as we failed to find the RST entry for the range. [CAUSE] Inside scrub_submit_extent_sector_read() every time we allocated a new bbio we immediately called btrfs_map_block() to make sure there was some RST range covering the scrub target. But if btrfs_map_block() fails, we immediately call endio for the bbio, while the bbio is newly allocated, it's completely empty. Then inside scrub_read_endio(), we go through the bvecs to find the sector number (as bi_sector is no longer reliable if the bio is submitted to lower layers). And since the bio is empty, such bvecs iteration would not find any sector matching the sector, and return sector_nr == stripe->nr_sectors, triggering the ASSERT(). [FIX] Instead of calling btrfs_map_block() after allocating a new bbio, call btrfs_map_block() first. Since our only objective of calling btrfs_map_block() is only to update stripe_len, there is really no need to do that after btrfs_alloc_bio(). This new timing would avoid the problem of handling empty bbio completely, and in fact fixes a possible race window for the old code, where if the submission thread is the only owner of the pending_io, the scrub would never finish (since we didn't decrease the pending_io counter). Although the root cause of RST lookup failure still needs to be addressed.

Is your site exposed to CVE-2024-41067?

Run a free security scan — no signup, results in seconds.

CVSS v3.1 Score

5.5
MEDIUM
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Affected Products

Vendor Product
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2024-41067? +
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: scrub: handle RST lookup error correctly [BUG] When running btrfs/060 with forced RST feature, it would crash the following ASSERT() inside scrub_read_endio(): ASSERT(sector_nr < stripe->nr_sectors); Before that, we would have tree dump from btrfs_get_raid_extent_offset(), as we failed to find the RST entry for the range. [CAUSE] Inside scrub_submit_extent_sector_read() every time we allocated a new bbio we immediately called btrfs_map_block() to make sure there was some RST range covering the scrub target. But if btrfs_map_block() fails, we immediately call endio for the bbio, while the bbio is newly allocated, it's completely empty. Then inside scrub_read_endio(), we go through the bvecs to find the sector number (as bi_sector is no longer reliable if the bio is submitted to lower layers). And since the bio is empty, such bvecs iteration would not find any sector matching the sector, and return sector_nr == stripe->nr_sectors, triggering the ASSERT(). [FIX] Instead of calling btrfs_map_block() after allocating a new bbio, call btrfs_map_block() first. Since our only objective of calling btrfs_map_block() is only to update stripe_len, there is really no need to do that after btrfs_alloc_bio(). This new timing would avoid the problem of handling empty bbio completely, and in fact fixes a possible race window for the old code, where if the submission thread is the only owner of the pending_io, the scrub would never finish (since we didn't decrease the pending_io counter). Although the root cause of RST lookup failure still needs to be addressed. It has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.5 (MEDIUM).
How severe is CVE-2024-41067? +
CVE-2024-41067 has a CVSS v3.1 score of 5.5 out of 10, rated MEDIUM. This is a medium-severity vulnerability that should be remediated as part of regular maintenance.
What products are affected by CVE-2024-41067? +
CVE-2024-41067 affects products from linux, specifically: linux_kernel. Check the affected products table above for specific version ranges.
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2024-41067? +
You can use Secably's free Website Scanner to check your website for known vulnerabilities. For infrastructure scanning, use the Port Scanner to identify exposed services that may be affected. Check the vendor advisories linked above for specific patch and version information.

Related Vulnerabilities

Don't wait for an exploit

Scan your website for vulnerabilities like CVE-2024-41067 — free, no signup required.