posix-clock: Fix missing timespec64 check in pc_clock_settime()
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: posix-clock: Fix missing timespec64 check in pc_clock_settime() As Andrew pointed out, it will make sense that the PTP core checked timespec64 struct's tv_sec and tv_nsec range before calling ptp->info->settime64(). As the man manual of clock_settime() said, if tp.tv_sec is negative or tp.tv_nsec is outside the range [0..999,999,999], it should return EINVAL, which include dynamic clocks which handles PTP clock, and the condition is consistent with timespec64_valid(). As Thomas suggested, timespec64_valid() only check the timespec is valid, but not ensure that the time is in a valid range, so check it ahead using timespec64_valid_strict() in pc_clock_settime() and return -EINVAL if not valid. There are some drivers that use tp->tv_sec and tp->tv_nsec directly to write registers without validity checks and assume that the higher layer has checked it, which is dangerous and will benefit from this, such as hclge_ptp_settime(), igb_ptp_settime_i210(), _rcar_gen4_ptp_settime(), and some drivers can remove the checks of itself.
- Products
- Kernel
- Affected versions
- Not specified
- Fixed versions
- 4.19.323, 5.10.228, 5.15.169, 5.4.285, 6.1.114, 6.11.5, 6.6.58
- CVEs
- CVE-2024-50195
- Confirmed fixed CVEs
- Not specified
- Updated in this feed
- 4 Nov 2026, 15:23 UTC · Revision 1
Source evidence
posix-clock: Fix missing timespec64 check in pc_clock_settime()
core-osv · Original sourcePublished 8 Nov 2024, 05:54 UTC
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: posix-clock: Fix missing timespec64 check in pc_clock_settime() As Andrew pointed out, it will make sense that the PTP core checked timespec64 struct's tv_sec and tv_nsec range before calling ptp->info->settime64(). As the man manual of clock_settime() said, if tp.tv_sec is negative or tp.tv_nsec is outside the range [0..999,999,999], it should return EINVAL, which include dynamic clocks which handles PTP clock, and the condition is consistent with timespec64_valid(). As Thomas suggested, timespec64_valid() only check the timespec is valid, but not ensure that the time is in a valid range, so check it ahead using timespec64_valid_strict() in pc_clock_settime() and return -EINVAL if not valid. There are some drivers that use tp->tv_sec and tp->tv_nsec directly to write registers without validity checks and assume that the higher layer has checked it, which is dangerous and will benefit from this, such as hclge_ptp_settime(), igb_ptp_settime_i210(), _rcar_gen4_ptp_settime(), and some drivers can remove the checks of itself.
osv:CVE-2024-50195
Kernel
Fixed versions: 4.19.323, 5.4.285, 5.10.228, 5.15.169, 6.1.114, 6.6.58, 6.11.5
Complete source record
{
"id": "39d90c20e12f1c0d92d1ffeea6f646999181b5df01bc18d734a825f1d4053be5",
"url": "https://osv.dev/vulnerability/CVE-2024-50195",
"method": "structured",
"payload": {
"kind": "advisory",
"title": "posix-clock: Fix missing timespec64 check in pc_clock_settime()",
"summary": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: posix-clock: Fix missing timespec64 check in pc_clock_settime() As Andrew pointed out, it will make sense that the PTP core checked timespec64 struct's tv_sec and tv_nsec range before calling ptp->info->settime64(). As the man manual of clock_settime() said, if tp.tv_sec is negative or tp.tv_nsec is outside the range [0..999,999,999], it should return EINVAL, which include dynamic clocks which handles PTP clock, and the condition is consistent with timespec64_valid(). As Thomas suggested, timespec64_valid() only check the timespec is valid, but not ensure that the time is in a valid range, so check it ahead using timespec64_valid_strict() in pc_clock_settime() and return -EINVAL if not valid. There are some drivers that use tp->tv_sec and tp->tv_nsec directly to write registers without validity checks and assume that the higher layer has checked it, which is dangerous and will benefit from this, such as hclge_ptp_settime(), igb_ptp_settime_i210(), _rcar_gen4_ptp_settime(), and some drivers can remove the checks of itself.",
"evidence": "osv:CVE-2024-50195",
"products": [
{
"name": {
"value": "Kernel",
"evidence": "/affected/1/package/name"
},
"prerequisites": [],
"fixed_versions": [
{
"value": "4.19.323",
"evidence": "/affected/1/ranges"
},
{
"value": "5.4.285",
"evidence": "/affected/1/ranges"
},
{
"value": "5.10.228",
"evidence": "/affected/1/ranges"
},
{
"value": "5.15.169",
"evidence": "/affected/1/ranges"
},
{
"value": "6.1.114",
"evidence": "/affected/1/ranges"
},
{
"value": "6.6.58",
"evidence": "/affected/1/ranges"
},
{
"value": "6.11.5",
"evidence": "/affected/1/ranges"
}
],
"affected_versions": []
}
],
"severity": "high",
"structured": {
"id": "CVE-2024-50195",
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-50195"
],
"metrics": [
{
"type": "CVSS_V3",
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H"
}
],
"affected": [
{
"ranges": [
{
"repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git",
"type": "GIT",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0606f422b453f76c31ab2b1bd52943ff06a2dcf2"
},
{
"fixed": "29f085345cde24566efb751f39e5d367c381c584"
},
{
"fixed": "e0c966bd3e31911b57ef76cec4c5796ebd88e512"
},
{
"fixed": "673a1c5a2998acbd429d6286e6cad10f17f4f073"
},
{
"fixed": "c8789fbe2bbf75845e45302cba6ffa44e1884d01"
},
{
"fixed": "27abbde44b6e71ee3891de13e1a228aa7ce95bfe"
},
{
"fixed": "a3f169e398215e71361774d13bf91a0101283ac2"
},
{
"fixed": "1ff7247101af723731ea42ed565d54fb8f341264"
},
{
"fixed": "d8794ac20a299b647ba9958f6d657051fc51a540"
}
]
}
],
"database_specific": {
"source": "https://storage.googleapis.com/cve-osv-conversion/osv-output/CVE-2024-50195.json"
}
},
{
"ranges": [
{
"type": "ECOSYSTEM",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.6.39"
},
{
"fixed": "4.19.323"
}
]
},
{
"type": "ECOSYSTEM",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "4.20.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.4.285"
}
]
},
{
"type": "ECOSYSTEM",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.5.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.10.228"
}
]
},
{
"type": "ECOSYSTEM",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.11.0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.15.169"
}
]
},
{
"type": "ECOSYSTEM",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "5.16.0"
},
{
"fixed": "6.1.114"
}
]
},
{
"type": "ECOSYSTEM",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "6.2.0"
},
{
"fixed": "6.6.58"
}
]
},
{
"type": "ECOSYSTEM",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "6.7.0"
},
{
"fixed": "6.11.5"
}
]
}
],
"package": {
"name": "Kernel",
"ecosystem": "Linux"
},
"database_specific": {
"source": "https://storage.googleapis.com/cve-osv-conversion/osv-output/CVE-2024-50195.json"
}
}
],
"modified": "2026-10-28T02:30:36.834537221Z",
"provider": "osv",
"references": [
"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1ff7247101af723731ea42ed565d54fb8f341264",
"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/27abbde44b6e71ee3891de13e1a228aa7ce95bfe",
"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/29f085345cde24566efb751f39e5d367c381c584",
"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/673a1c5a2998acbd429d6286e6cad10f17f4f073",
"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a3f169e398215e71361774d13bf91a0101283ac2",
"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c8789fbe2bbf75845e45302cba6ffa44e1884d01",
"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d8794ac20a299b647ba9958f6d657051fc51a540",
"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e0c966bd3e31911b57ef76cec4c5796ebd88e512",
"https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2025/01/msg00001.html",
"https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2025/03/msg00002.html",
"https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/tree/main/cves/2024/50xxx/CVE-2024-50195.json",
"https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-50195",
"https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git"
],
"provider_metadata": {
"cna_assigner": "Linux",
"osv_generated_from": "https://github.com/CVEProject/cvelistV5/tree/main/cves/2024/50xxx/CVE-2024-50195.json"
}
},
"related_cves": [
{
"value": "CVE-2024-50195",
"evidence": "/id"
}
],
"security_relevant": true,
"severity_evidence": "/severity/0/score"
},
"source_id": "core-osv",
"document_id": 504076,
"published_at": "2024-11-08T05:54:10.183+00:00"
}