Описание
xfrm: validate new SA's prefixlen using SA family when sel.family is unset
FAQ
Is Azure Linux the only Microsoft product that includes this open-source library and is therefore potentially affected by this vulnerability?
One of the main benefits to our customers who choose to use the Azure Linux distro is the commitment to keep it up to date with the most recent and most secure versions of the open source libraries with which the distro is composed. Microsoft is committed to transparency in this work which is why we began publishing CSAF/VEX in October 2025. See this blog post for more information. If impact to additional products is identified, we will update the CVE to reflect this.
EPSS
Связанные уязвимости
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xfrm: validate new SA's prefixlen using SA family when sel.family is unset This expands the validation introduced in commit 07bf7908950a ("xfrm: Validate address prefix lengths in the xfrm selector.") syzbot created an SA with usersa.sel.family = AF_UNSPEC usersa.sel.prefixlen_s = 128 usersa.family = AF_INET Because of the AF_UNSPEC selector, verify_newsa_info doesn't put limits on prefixlen_{s,d}. But then copy_from_user_state sets x->sel.family to usersa.family (AF_INET). Do the same conversion in verify_newsa_info before validating prefixlen_{s,d}, since that's how prefixlen is going to be used later on.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xfrm: validate new SA's prefixlen using SA family when sel.family is unset This expands the validation introduced in commit 07bf7908950a ("xfrm: Validate address prefix lengths in the xfrm selector.") syzbot created an SA with usersa.sel.family = AF_UNSPEC usersa.sel.prefixlen_s = 128 usersa.family = AF_INET Because of the AF_UNSPEC selector, verify_newsa_info doesn't put limits on prefixlen_{s,d}. But then copy_from_user_state sets x->sel.family to usersa.family (AF_INET). Do the same conversion in verify_newsa_info before validating prefixlen_{s,d}, since that's how prefixlen is going to be used later on.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xfrm: validate new SA's prefixlen using SA family when sel.family is unset This expands the validation introduced in commit 07bf7908950a ("xfrm: Validate address prefix lengths in the xfrm selector.") syzbot created an SA with usersa.sel.family = AF_UNSPEC usersa.sel.prefixlen_s = 128 usersa.family = AF_INET Because of the AF_UNSPEC selector, verify_newsa_info doesn't put limits on prefixlen_{s,d}. But then copy_from_user_state sets x->sel.family to usersa.family (AF_INET). Do the same conversion in verify_newsa_info before validating prefixlen_{s,d}, since that's how prefixlen is going to be used later on.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: x ...
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xfrm: validate new SA's prefixlen using SA family when sel.family is unset This expands the validation introduced in commit 07bf7908950a ("xfrm: Validate address prefix lengths in the xfrm selector.") syzbot created an SA with usersa.sel.family = AF_UNSPEC usersa.sel.prefixlen_s = 128 usersa.family = AF_INET Because of the AF_UNSPEC selector, verify_newsa_info doesn't put limits on prefixlen_{s,d}. But then copy_from_user_state sets x->sel.family to usersa.family (AF_INET). Do the same conversion in verify_newsa_info before validating prefixlen_{s,d}, since that's how prefixlen is going to be used later on.
EPSS