# CVE-2024-57930: tracing: Have process_string() also allow arrays

> A false positive in kernel tracing validation could incorrectly flag safe array references, potentially causing unnecessary warnings or instability in tracing subsystems.

- **Severity:** Medium 5.5 (`CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H`)
- **Exploited in the wild:** Not known
- **Login needed:** Any signed-in user
- **Attackable:** Local or same network only
- **Victim action needed:** Not needed
- **Fix available:** Yes
- **Published:** 21 Jan 2025
- **Updated:** 11 May 2026
- **Also known as:** BELL-CVE-2024-57930, DEBIAN-CVE-2024-57930, GHSA-j6wf-6qh3-cm45, UBUNTU-CVE-2024-57930

## What is CVE-2024-57930?

CVE-2024-57930 is a medium-severity vulnerability in Linux kernel, published on 21 Jan 2025. It can only be exploited from the same machine or local network, with no action from the victim.

### Official description

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

tracing: Have process_string() also allow arrays

In order to catch a common bug where a TRACE_EVENT() TP_fast_assign()
assigns an address of an allocated string to the ring buffer and then
references it in TP_printk(), which can be executed hours later when the
string is free, the function test_event_printk() runs on all events as
they are registered to make sure there's no unwanted dereferencing.

It calls process_string() to handle cases in TP_printk() format that has
"%s". It returns whether or not the string is safe. But it can have some
false positives.

For instance, xe_bo_move() has:

 TP_printk("move_lacks_source:%s, migrate object %p [size %zu] from %s to %s device_id:%s",
            __entry->move_lacks_source ? "yes" : "no", __entry->bo, __entry->size,
            xe_mem_type_to_name[__entry->old_placement],
            xe_mem_type_to_name[__entry->new_placement], __get_str(device_id))

Where the "%s" references into xe_mem_type_to_name[]. This is an array of
pointers that should be safe for the event to access. Instead of flagging
this as a bad reference, if a reference points to an array, where the
record field is the index, consider it safe.

## Which versions are affected by CVE-2024-57930?

It affects 1 product.


Products: Linux kernel.

## How do I fix CVE-2024-57930?

Apply the vendor's patch.

## Is CVE-2024-57930 being exploited?

There is no known exploitation of CVE-2024-57930 in the wild and no public exploit code.

## Other vulnerabilities in Linux kernel

- [CVE-2026-53266](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-53266/): Linux Kernel Out-of-Bounds Write (high 8.8, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2013-6282](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2013-6282/): Linux Kernel Improper Input Validation (high 8.8, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2022-0185](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2022-0185/): Linux Kernel Heap-Based Buffer Overflow (high 8.4, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2013-2094](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2013-2094/): Linux Kernel Privilege Escalation (high 8.4, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2026-53362](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-53362/): Linux Kernel Unspecified (high 7.8, exploited in the wild)

## Fix prompt for AI coding agents

```text
Check this codebase for CVE-2024-57930 and fix it if it is affected.

What it is: CVE-2024-57930 is a medium-severity vulnerability in Linux kernel, published on 21 Jan 2025. It can only be exploited from the same machine or local network, with no action from the victim.
Exploitation: There is no known exploitation of CVE-2024-57930 in the wild and no public exploit code.

Affected product: Linux kernel. No package-level version data is available, so check the vendor advisory linked from the reference page.

Task:
1. Search the dependency manifests and lockfiles (for example package.json, package-lock.json, requirements.txt, poetry.lock, uv.lock, pom.xml, build.gradle, go.mod, Cargo.lock, Gemfile.lock) and any Dockerfiles for the affected packages, including transitive dependencies.
2. If an affected version is in use, upgrade it to the fixed version for its release line with the project's package manager, so the lockfile is regenerated. Prefer the smallest upgrade that fixes it.
3. If there is no fix, or the upgrade would break the build, do not guess: explain the risk and the safest workaround instead.
4. Run the tests and summarise what changed and why.
5. If nothing in the project is affected, say so and change nothing.

Reference: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2024-57930/ (Markdown: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2024-57930/index.md)
```

## Sources

- CVE record: https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-57930
- NVD: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-57930
- OSV: https://osv.dev/vulnerability/CVE-2024-57930

---
From sbomify Insights: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2024-57930/
Summaries are generated and may contain mistakes; the official description above is the record.