cve/2024/CVE-2024-50142.md

### [CVE-2024-50142](https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2024-50142)
![](https://img.shields.io/static/v1?label=Product&message=Linux&color=blue)
![](https://img.shields.io/static/v1?label=Version&message=&color=brightgreen)
![](https://img.shields.io/static/v1?label=Version&message=1da177e4c3f41524e886b7f1b8a0c1fc7321cac2%20&color=brightgreen)
![](https://img.shields.io/static/v1?label=Version&message=2.6.12%20&color=brightgreen)
![](https://img.shields.io/static/v1?label=Vulnerability&message=n%2Fa&color=blue)

### Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:xfrm: validate new SA's prefixlen using SA family when sel.family is unsetThis expands the validation introduced in commit 07bf7908950a ("xfrm:Validate address prefix lengths in the xfrm selector.")syzbot created an SA with    usersa.sel.family = AF_UNSPEC    usersa.sel.prefixlen_s = 128    usersa.family = AF_INETBecause of the AF_UNSPEC selector, verify_newsa_info doesn't putlimits on prefixlen_{s,d}. But then copy_from_user_state setsx->sel.family to usersa.family (AF_INET). Do the same conversion inverify_newsa_info before validating prefixlen_{s,d}, since that's howprefixlen is going to be used later on.

### POC

#### Reference
No PoCs from references.

#### Github
- https://github.com/w4zu/Debian_security