CVE-2024-26837

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 2024-04-17. NVD baseline CVSS 4.7; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, NVD CVSS v3
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:

net: bridge: switchdev: Skip MDB replays of deferred events on offload

Before this change, generation of the list of MDB events to replay would race against the creation of new group memberships, either from the IGMP/MLD snooping logic or from user configuration.

While new memberships are immediately visible to walkers of br->mdb_list, the notification of their existence to switchdev event subscribers is deferred until a later point in time. So if a replay list was generated during a time that overlapped with such a window, it would also contain a replay of the not-yet-delivered event.

The driver would thus receive two copies of what the bridge internally considered to be one single event. On destruction of the bridge, only a single membership deletion event was therefore sent. As a consequence of this, drivers which reference count memberships (at least DSA), would be left with orphan groups in their hardware database when the bridge was destroyed.

This is only an issue when replaying additions. While deletion events may still be pending on the deferred queue, they will already have been removed from br->mdb_list, so no duplicates can be generated in that scenario.

To a user this meant that old group memberships, from a bridge in which a port was previously attached, could be reanimated (in hardware) when the port joined a new bridge, without the new bridge's knowledge.

For example, on an mv88e6xxx system, create a snooping bridge and immediately add a port to it:

root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ ip link add dev br0 up type bridge mcast_snooping 1 && \ > ip link set dev x3 up master br0

And then destroy the bridge:

root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ ip link del dev br0 root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ mvls atu ADDRESS FID STATE Q F 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a DEV:0 Marvell 88E6393X 33:33:00:00:00:6a 1 static - - 0 . . . . . . . . . . 33:33:ff:87:e4:3f 1 static - - 0 . . . . . . . . . . ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff 1 static - - 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 a root@infix-06-0b-00:~$

The two IPv6 groups remain in the hardware database because the port (x3) is notified of the host's membership twice: once via the original event and once via a replay. Since only a single delete notification is sent, the count remains at 1 when the bridge is destroyed.

Then add the same port (or another port belonging to the same hardware domain) to a new bridge, this time with snooping disabled:

root@infix-06-0b-00:~$ ip link add dev br1 up type bridge mcast_snooping 0 && \ > ip link set dev x3 up master br1

All multicast, including the two IPv6 groups from br0, should now be flooded, according to the policy of br1. But instead the old memberships are still active in the hardware database, causing the switch to only forward traffic to those groups towards the CPU (port 0).

Eliminate the race in two steps:

  • Grab the write-side lock of the MDB while generating the replay
list.

This prevents new memberships from showing up while we are generating the replay list. But it leaves the scenario in which a deferred event was already generated, but not delivered, before we grabbed the lock. Therefore:

  • Make sure that no deferred version of a replay event is already
enqueued to the switchdev deferred queue, before adding it to the replay list, when replaying additions.

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 SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at every mission impact level.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (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
5th
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 2026-10-17). 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 every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.

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

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (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)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). 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

April 17, 2024

Last Modified

April 2, 2025

Patch Availability(14)

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

(3 across 3 ecosystems)
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.1.27-1 ... 6.1.76-1~bpo11+1 (18 versions)
  • every version up to 6.1.82-1: fixed in 6.1.82-1
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux—
  • every version up to 6.7.7-1: fixed in 6.7.7-1
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux—
  • every version up to 6.7.7-1: fixed in 6.7.7-1
—

Weakness Classification(1)

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

Additional Vendor Advisories

(9)

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 8× in last 7d / 32× 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 93 of 186 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. 7 repeat rows among the latest 100 are merged into the row they repeat. The 93 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

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

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2024-26837?
CVE-2024-26837 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on April 17, 2024. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: bridge: switchdev: Skip MDB replays of deferred events on offload Before this change, generation of the list of MDB events to replay would race against the creation of new group memberships, either from the IGMP/MLD snooping…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2024-26837 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2024-26837 was published on April 17, 2024. 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 April 2, 2025; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2024-26837 actively exploited?
CVE-2024-26837 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (5th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2024-26837?
CVE-2024-26837 has a CVSS v3 base score of 4.7 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2024-26837?
A fix for CVE-2024-26837 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2024-26837 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-2024-26837

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2024-26837?

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