VulnerabilityPublished 5 Apr 2024Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-31083: xorg-x11-server · Use After Free

Affects xorg-x11-serverSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.8 High.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 13:47 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.8High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 1.8% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 79% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: High

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 5 Apr 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hatredhat/xorg-x11-server`pkg:rpm/redhat/xorg-x11-server`Other threats	Affected =21.1.12	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Organizations should immediately verify if their systems run Xorg server version 21.1.12 and prioritize upgrading to a patched version once available. In the absence of an official patch, administrators should restrict access to the X server to trusted users only, minimizing the risk of authenticated attackers exploiting the flaw. Employing access controls such as limiting local user accounts, using mandatory access control frameworks (e.g., SELinux, AppArmor) to confine Xorg processes, and disabling unnecessary graphical services can reduce attack surface. Monitoring logs for unusual glyph-related requests or crashes may help detect exploitation attempts. Additionally, consider isolating critical systems from untrusted users and networks. Security teams should stay alert for vendor advisories and apply updates promptly. Implementing multi-factor authentication for local access and enforcing strict user privilege separation further mitigates risk. Finally, conduct regular security audits and penetration testing focusing on graphical subsystem vulnerabilities.

Description

A use-after-free vulnerability was found in the ProcRenderAddGlyphs() function of Xorg servers. This issue occurs when AllocateGlyph() is called to store new glyphs sent by the client to the X server, potentially resulting in multiple entries pointing to the same non-refcounted glyphs. Consequently, ProcRenderAddGlyphs() may free a glyph, leading to a use-after-free scenario when the same glyph pointer is subsequently accessed. This flaw allows an authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code on the system by sending a specially crafted request.

Impact

The vulnerability allows an authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code on affected systems, potentially leading to full system compromise. This threatens confidentiality by exposing sensitive data, integrity by allowing unauthorized code execution and system modifications, and availability by potentially causing system crashes or denial of service. Since Xorg servers often run with elevated privileges and manage graphical sessions, exploitation could enable attackers to escalate privileges, install persistent malware, or disrupt critical services. Organizations using affected Xorg versions in desktop environments, servers, or virtualized graphical sessions face risks of targeted attacks or lateral movement within networks. The requirement for authentication limits remote exploitation but does not eliminate risk, especially in multi-user or shared environments. The absence of known exploits in the wild suggests a window for proactive mitigation, but the vulnerability's severity and ease of exploitation warrant urgent remediation.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…