CVE-2024-43880

MEDIUMNVD 5.55.5
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

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

Score 5.5 from GitHub Security Advisory published 2024-08-21. NVD baseline CVSS 5.5; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, NVD CVSS v3
Trending — 3 sources updated this week
5.5EG
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: 5.5Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

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

mlxsw: spectrum_acl_erp: Fix object nesting warning

ACLs in Spectrum-2 and newer ASICs can reside in the algorithmic TCAM (A-TCAM) or in the ordinary circuit TCAM (C-TCAM). The former can contain more ACLs (i.e., tc filters), but the number of masks in each region (i.e., tc chain) is limited.

In order to mitigate the effects of the above limitation, the device allows filters to share a single mask if their masks only differ in up to 8 consecutive bits. For example, dst_ip/25 can be represented using dst_ip/24 with a delta of 1 bit. The C-TCAM does not have a limit on the number of masks being used (and therefore does not support mask aggregation), but can contain a limited number of filters.

The driver uses the "objagg" library to perform the mask aggregation by passing it objects that consist of the filter's mask and whether the filter is to be inserted into the A-TCAM or the C-TCAM since filters in different TCAMs cannot share a mask.

The set of created objects is dependent on the insertion order of the filters and is not necessarily optimal. Therefore, the driver will periodically ask the library to compute a more optimal set ("hints") by looking at all the existing objects.

When the library asks the driver whether two objects can be aggregated the driver only compares the provided masks and ignores the A-TCAM / C-TCAM indication. This is the right thing to do since the goal is to move as many filters as possible to the A-TCAM. The driver also forbids two identical masks from being aggregated since this can only happen if one was intentionally put in the C-TCAM to avoid a conflict in the A-TCAM.

The above can result in the following set of hints:

H1: {mask X, A-TCAM} -> H2: {mask Y, A-TCAM} // X is Y + delta H3: {mask Y, C-TCAM} -> H4: {mask Z, A-TCAM} // Y is Z + delta

After getting the hints from the library the driver will start migrating filters from one region to another while consulting the computed hints and instructing the device to perform a lookup in both regions during the transition.

Assuming a filter with mask X is being migrated into the A-TCAM in the new region, the hints lookup will return H1. Since H2 is the parent of H1, the library will try to find the object associated with it and create it if necessary in which case another hints lookup (recursive) will be performed. This hints lookup for {mask Y, A-TCAM} will either return H2 or H3 since the driver passes the library an object comparison function that ignores the A-TCAM / C-TCAM indication.

This can eventually lead to nested objects which are not supported by the library [1].

Fix by removing the object comparison function from both the driver and the library as the driver was the only user. That way the lookup will only return exact matches.

I do not have a reliable reproducer that can reproduce the issue in a timely manner, but before the fix the issue would reproduce in several minutes and with the fix it does not reproduce in over an hour.

Note that the current usefulness of the hints is limited because they include the C-TCAM indication and represent aggregation that cannot actually happen. This will be addressed in net-next.

[1] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 153 at lib/objagg.c:170 objagg_obj_parent_assign+0xb5/0xd0 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 PID: 153 Comm: kworker/0:18 Not tainted 6.9.0-rc6-custom-g70fbc2c1c38b #42 Hardware name: Mellanox Technologies Ltd. MSN3700C/VMOD0008, BIOS 5.11 10/10/2018 Workqueue: mlxsw_core mlxsw_sp_acl_tcam_vregion_rehash_work RIP: 0010:objagg_obj_parent_assign+0xb5/0xd0 [...] Call Trace: __objagg_obj_get+0x2bb/0x580 objagg_obj_get+0xe/0x80 mlxsw_sp_acl_erp_mask_get+0xb5/0xf0 mlxsw_sp_acl_atcam_entry_add+0xe8/0x3c0 mlxsw_sp_acl_tcam_entry_create+0x5e/0xa0 mlxsw_sp_acl_tcam_vchunk_migrate_one+0x16b/0x270 mlxsw_sp_acl_tcam_vregion_rehash_work+0xbe/0x510 process_one_work+0x151/0x370

CVSS v3
5.5
EG Score
5.5MEDIUMmedium confidence
EG Risk
25
EG Risk 25/100

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)
Severity55% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 5.5 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
12th
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 (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
5.5 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

August 21, 2024

Last Modified

August 5, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2024-43880(3)

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

Patch Availability(20)

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

(5 across 4 ecosystems)
Debian:11(2)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux5.10.103-1 ... 5.10.92-2 (43 versions)
  • every version up to 5.10.226-1: fixed in 5.10.226-1
—
linux-6.16.1.106-3~deb11u1, 6.1.106-3~deb11u2, 6.1.106-3~deb11u3, 6.1.112-1~deb11u1
  • every version up to 6.1.119-1~deb11u1: fixed in 6.1.119-1~deb11u1
—
Debian:12(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.1.27-1 ... 6.1.99-1 (26 versions)
  • every version up to 6.1.106-1: fixed in 6.1.106-1
—
Debian:13(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux—
  • every version up to 6.10.3-1: fixed in 6.10.3-1
—
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux—
  • every version up to 6.10.3-1: fixed in 6.10.3-1
—

Weakness Classification(1)

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

Additional Vendor Advisories

(16)

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 9× in last 7d / 35× 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 96 of 201 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. 4 repeat rows among the latest 100 are merged into the row they repeat. The 105 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% · 12th percentile
  2. 2026-10-22 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  3. 2026-10-21 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  4. 2026-10-20 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  5. 2026-10-19 18:25 UTCOSV refresh
  6. 2026-10-19 16:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  7. 2026-10-18 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  8. 2026-10-18 07:01 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-17 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  10. 2026-10-16 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  11. 2026-10-15 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  12. 2026-10-14 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  13. 2026-10-13 16:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  14. 2026-10-12 17:46 UTCEG score recompute
  15. 2026-10-12 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  16. 2026-10-11 21:11 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-10-11 16:03 UTCEG score recompute
  18. 2026-10-11 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  19. 2026-10-10 19:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  20. 2026-10-09 20:05 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  21. 2026-10-08 17:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  22. 2026-10-07 23:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  23. 2026-10-06 15:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  24. 2026-10-05 17:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  25. 2026-10-04 23:20 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
Show 71 more
  1. 2026-10-03 14:24 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  2. 2026-10-01 19:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  3. 2026-09-30 19:52 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-09-30 15:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  5. 2026-09-29 15:17 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  6. 2026-09-28 13:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  7. 2026-09-27 13:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  8. 2026-09-26 23:12 UTCOSV refresh
  9. 2026-09-26 15:57 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  10. 2026-09-24 14:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 11th percentile
  11. 2026-09-23 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  12. 2026-09-22 14:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  13. 2026-09-21 20:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  14. 2026-09-20 20:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  15. 2026-09-19 15:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  16. 2026-09-18 19:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  17. 2026-09-16 14:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  18. 2026-09-16 05:12 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  19. 2026-09-15 03:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  20. 2026-09-13 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  21. 2026-09-12 14:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  22. 2026-09-11 14:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  23. 2026-09-11 09:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  24. 2026-09-08 21:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  25. 2026-09-07 16:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  26. 2026-09-07 08:48 UTCOSV refresh
  27. 2026-09-06 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  28. 2026-09-05 15:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  29. 2026-09-04 13:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  30. 2026-09-04 05:05 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  31. 2026-09-02 14:10 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  32. 2026-09-01 13:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  33. 2026-08-30 19:16 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  34. 2026-08-28 21:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  35. 2026-08-27 14:23 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  36. 2026-08-25 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  37. 2026-08-24 14:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  38. 2026-08-23 00:18 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  39. 2026-08-21 23:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  40. 2026-08-20 22:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  41. 2026-08-20 18:31 UTCOSV refresh
  42. 2026-08-19 17:02 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  43. 2026-08-18 13:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  44. 2026-08-17 13:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  45. 2026-08-16 14:54 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  46. 2026-08-16 02:13 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  47. 2026-08-15 01:28 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  48. 2026-08-13 21:59 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  49. 2026-08-12 13:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  50. 2026-08-11 13:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  51. 2026-08-10 23:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  52. 2026-08-09 13:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  53. 2026-08-08 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  54. 2026-08-07 16:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  55. 2026-08-06 13:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  56. 2026-08-05 19:16 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 13th percentile
  57. 2026-08-05 12:03 UTCEG score recompute
  58. 2026-08-05 12:03 UTCVendor advisory
  59. 2026-08-05 12:03 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-ww6f-c2qm-6v83 · GitHub CVSS 5.5
  60. 2026-08-04 15:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  61. 2026-08-04 11:54 UTCEG score recompute
  62. 2026-08-04 11:54 UTCVendor advisory
  63. 2026-08-04 11:54 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-ww6f-c2qm-6v83 · GitHub CVSS 5.5
  64. 2026-08-04 10:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  65. 2026-08-03 10:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  66. 2026-08-02 02:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  67. 2026-08-01 04:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  68. 2026-07-31 02:34 UTCOSV refresh
  69. 2026-07-30 01:29 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  70. 2026-07-28 15:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile
  71. 2026-07-27 14:11 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 12th percentile

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2024-43880?
CVE-2024-43880 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on August 21, 2024. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mlxsw: spectrumaclerp: Fix object nesting warning ACLs in Spectrum-2 and newer ASICs can reside in the algorithmic TCAM (A-TCAM) or in the ordinary circuit TCAM (C-TCAM). The former can contain more ACLs (i.e., tc filters), but the…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2024-43880 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2024-43880 was published on August 21, 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 August 5, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2024-43880 actively exploited?
CVE-2024-43880 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.2% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (12th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2024-43880?
CVE-2024-43880 has a CVSS v3 base score of 5.5 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2024-43880?
A fix for CVE-2024-43880 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2024-43880 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-2024-43880

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2024-43880?

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