CVE-2023-52934

MEDIUMNVD 4.74.7
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

Score 4.7 from GitHub Security Advisory published 2025-03-27. NVD baseline CVSS 4.7; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: epss, ghsa, nvd
4.7
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorLow exploitation likelihood right now — keep watching.
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS: 0%CVSS: 4.7Exploit: NoneExposed: 0

A fix is available — apply it.

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

mm/MADV_COLLAPSE: catch !none !huge !bad pmd lookups

In commit 34488399fa08 ("mm/madvise: add file and shmem support to MADV_COLLAPSE") we make the following change to find_pmd_or_thp_or_none():

  • if (!pmd_present(pmde))
  • return SCAN_PMD_NULL;
+ if (pmd_none(pmde)) + return SCAN_PMD_NONE;

This was for-use by MADV_COLLAPSE file/shmem codepaths, where MADV_COLLAPSE might identify a pte-mapped hugepage, only to have khugepaged race-in, free the pte table, and clear the pmd. Such codepaths include:

A) If we find a suitably-aligned compound page of order HPAGE_PMD_ORDER already in the pagecache. B) In retract_page_tables(), if we fail to grab mmap_lock for the target mm/address.

In these cases, collapse_pte_mapped_thp() really does expect a none (not just !present) pmd, and we want to suitably identify that case separate from the case where no pmd is found, or it's a bad-pmd (of course, many things could happen once we drop mmap_lock, and the pmd could plausibly undergo multiple transitions due to intervening fault, split, etc). Regardless, the code is prepared install a huge-pmd only when the existing pmd entry is either a genuine pte-table-mapping-pmd, or the none-pmd.

However, the commit introduces a logical hole; namely, that we've allowed !none- && !huge- && !bad-pmds to be classified as genuine pte-table-mapping-pmds. One such example that could leak through are swap entries. The pmd values aren't checked again before use in pte_offset_map_lock(), which is expecting nothing less than a genuine pte-table-mapping-pmd.

We want to put back the !pmd_present() check (below the pmd_none() check), but need to be careful to deal with subtleties in pmd transitions and treatments by various arch.

The issue is that __split_huge_pmd_locked() temporarily clears the present bit (or otherwise marks the entry as invalid), but pmd_present() and pmd_trans_huge() still need to return true while the pmd is in this transitory state. For example, x86's pmd_present() also checks the _PAGE_PSE , riscv's version also checks the _PAGE_LEAF bit, and arm64 also checks a PMD_PRESENT_INVALID bit.

Covering all 4 cases for x86 (all checks done on the same pmd value):

1) pmd_present() && pmd_trans_huge() All we actually know here is that the PSE bit is set. Either: a) We aren't racing with __split_huge_page(), and PRESENT or PROTNONE is set. => huge-pmd b) We are currently racing with __split_huge_page(). The danger here is that we proceed as-if we have a huge-pmd, but really we are looking at a pte-mapping-pmd. So, what is the risk of this danger?

The only relevant path is:

madvise_collapse() -> collapse_pte_mapped_thp()

Where we might just incorrectly report back "success", when really the memory isn't pmd-backed. This is fine, since split could happen immediately after (actually) successful madvise_collapse(). So, it should be safe to just assume huge-pmd here.

2) pmd_present() && !pmd_trans_huge() Either: a) PSE not set and either PRESENT or PROTNONE is. => pte-table-mapping pmd (or PROT_NONE) b) devmap. This routine can be called immediately after unlocking/locking mmap_lock -- or called with no locks held (see khugepaged_scan_mm_slot()), so previous VMA checks have since been invalidated.

3) !pmd_present() && pmd_trans_huge() Not possible.

4) !pmd_present() && !pmd_trans_huge() Neither PRESENT nor PROTNONE set => not present

I've checked all archs that implement pmd_trans_huge() (arm64, riscv, powerpc, longarch, x86, mips, s390) and this logic roughly translates (though devmap treatment is unique to x86 and powerpc, and (3) doesn't necessarily hold in general -- but that doesn't matter since !pmd_present() always takes failure path).

Also, add a comment above find_pmd_or_thp_or_none() ---truncated---

CVSS v3
4.7
EG Score
4.7(medium)
EG Risk
26(Track)
EG Risk 26/100SSVC: Track

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score: it fuses intrinsic severity with real-world exploitation and automatability so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner. Distinct from the 0–10 EG Score (severity).

How it’s computed
Severity47% × 45%
Exploitation0% × 40%
Automatability30% × 15%
Action: Routine — remediate on your standard cadence.
EPSS
1.3%
KEV
Not listed

Published

March 27, 2025

Last Modified

October 28, 2025

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2023-52934(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Patch Availability(1)

Vendor / EcosystemFixed in / PatchReleasedSource
redhatkernel-0:5.14.0-427.13.1.el9_42024-04-30redhat

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.

Weakness Classification(1)

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

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 13× in last 7d / 38× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. 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. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-07-23 02:29 UTCEG score recompute
  2. 2026-07-22 23:16 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-07-22 14:07 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-07-22 14:07 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-07-21 15:23 UTCEPSS rescore
  6. 2026-07-20 17:06 UTCEPSS rescore
  7. 2026-07-19 14:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  8. 2026-07-19 14:29 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-07-19 02:27 UTCEPSS rescore
  10. 2026-07-19 02:27 UTCEPSS rescore
  11. 2026-07-18 10:03 UTCEPSS rescore
  12. 2026-07-18 10:03 UTCEPSS rescore
  13. 2026-07-16 17:01 UTCEPSS rescore
  14. 2026-07-15 16:56 UTCEPSS rescore
  15. 2026-07-13 22:28 UTCEPSS rescore
  16. 2026-07-13 22:28 UTCEPSS rescore
  17. 2026-07-13 06:11 UTCEPSS rescore
  18. 2026-07-12 05:45 UTCEPSS rescore
  19. 2026-07-12 05:45 UTCEPSS rescore
  20. 2026-07-09 19:08 UTCEPSS rescore
  21. 2026-07-07 13:45 UTCEPSS rescore
  22. 2026-07-07 13:44 UTCEPSS rescore
  23. 2026-07-07 06:21 UTCOSV refresh
  24. 2026-07-05 02:29 UTCEPSS rescore
  25. 2026-07-04 06:29 UTCEPSS rescore
Show 52 more
  1. 2026-07-01 15:05 UTCEPSS rescore
  2. 2026-06-30 23:21 UTCEPSS rescore
  3. 2026-06-30 23:21 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-06-28 14:06 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-06-28 14:06 UTCEPSS rescore
  6. 2026-06-28 04:55 UTCEPSS rescore
  7. 2026-06-27 03:07 UTCEPSS rescore
  8. 2026-06-25 13:48 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-06-25 13:48 UTCEPSS rescore
  10. 2026-06-24 14:04 UTCEPSS rescore
  11. 2026-06-24 14:04 UTCEPSS rescore
  12. 2026-06-23 21:31 UTCEPSS rescore
  13. 2026-06-23 21:31 UTCEPSS rescore
  14. 2026-06-21 01:58 UTCEPSS rescore
  15. 2026-06-21 01:58 UTCEPSS rescore
  16. 2026-06-18 17:51 UTCEPSS rescore
  17. 2026-06-18 17:35 UTCOSV refresh
  18. 2026-06-17 17:51 UTCEPSS rescore
  19. 2026-06-15 17:47 UTCEPSS rescore
  20. 2026-06-14 23:16 UTCEPSS rescore
  21. 2026-06-13 22:59 UTCEPSS rescore
  22. 2026-06-13 22:59 UTCEPSS rescore
  23. 2026-06-12 23:11 UTCEPSS rescore
  24. 2026-06-11 13:59 UTCEPSS rescore
  25. 2026-06-10 22:17 UTCEPSS rescore
  26. 2026-06-10 13:21 UTCEPSS rescore
  27. 2026-06-08 14:16 UTCEPSS rescore
  28. 2026-06-08 14:16 UTCEPSS rescore
  29. 2026-06-07 15:24 UTCEPSS rescore
  30. 2026-06-07 15:24 UTCEPSS rescore
  31. 2026-06-06 13:46 UTCEPSS rescore
  32. 2026-06-06 13:46 UTCEPSS rescore
  33. 2026-06-05 22:46 UTCEPSS rescore
  34. 2026-06-05 22:46 UTCEPSS rescore
  35. 2026-06-05 06:09 UTCEPSS rescore
  36. 2026-06-05 06:09 UTCEPSS rescore
  37. 2026-06-04 13:11 UTCEPSS rescore
  38. 2026-06-04 13:11 UTCEPSS rescore
  39. 2026-06-02 20:12 UTCEPSS rescore
  40. 2026-06-02 20:12 UTCEPSS rescore
  41. 2026-06-01 13:51 UTCEPSS rescore
  42. 2026-05-31 22:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  43. 2026-05-31 22:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  44. 2026-05-31 00:15 UTCEPSS rescore
  45. 2026-05-31 00:15 UTCEPSS rescore
  46. 2026-05-30 08:44 UTCVendor advisory
  47. 2026-05-30 08:44 UTCGHSA enrichment
  48. 2026-05-30 08:44 UTCEG score recompute
  49. 2026-05-30 08:44 UTCVendor advisory
  50. 2026-05-30 08:44 UTCGHSA enrichment
  51. 2026-05-29 17:50 UTCOSV refresh
  52. 2026-05-29 13:43 UTCEPSS rescore

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2023-52934?
CVE-2023-52934 is a medium vulnerability published on March 27, 2025. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/MADV_COLLAPSE: catch !none !huge !bad pmd lookups In commit 34488399fa08 ("mm/madvise: add file and shmem support to MADVCOLLAPSE") we make the following change to findpmdorthpornone(): if (!pmd_present(pmde)) return…
When was CVE-2023-52934 disclosed?
CVE-2023-52934 was first published in the National Vulnerability Database on March 27, 2025, with the most recent update on October 28, 2025. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2023-52934 actively exploited?
CVE-2023-52934 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 1.3% percentile likelihood of exploitation in the next 30 days — higher percentiles indicate greater predicted risk.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2023-52934?
CVE-2023-52934 has a CVSS v3 base score of 4.7 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2023-52934?
Patch to the fixed version published by the affected vendor. Where vendor advisories exist for CVE-2023-52934, EchelonGraph cross-links them in the Vendor Advisories panel below — those typically contain the canonical remediation steps, fixed version numbers, and any vendor-specific mitigations.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2023-52934

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2023-52934?

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