Количество 6
Количество 6
CVE-2026-53106
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Do not allow deleting local storage in NMI Currently, local storage may deadlock when deferring freeing selem or local storage through kfree_rcu(), call_rcu() or call_rcu_tasks_trace() in NMI or reentrant. Since deleting selem in NMI is an unlikely use case, partially mitigate it by returning error when calling from bpf_xxx_storage_delete() helpers in NMI. Note that, it is still possible to deadlock through reentrant. A full mitigation requires returning error when irqs_disabled() is true, which, however is too heavy-handed for bpf_xxx_storage_delete(). The long-term solution requires _nolock versions of call_rcu. Another possible solution is to defer the free through irq_work [0], but it would grow the size of selem, which is non-ideal. The check is only needed in bpf_selem_unlink(), which is used by helpers and syscalls. bpf_selem_unlink_nofail() is fine as it is called during map and owner tear down that nev...
CVE-2026-53106
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Do not allow deleting local storage in NMI Currently, local storage may deadlock when deferring freeing selem or local storage through kfree_rcu(), call_rcu() or call_rcu_tasks_trace() in NMI or reentrant. Since deleting selem in NMI is an unlikely use case, partially mitigate it by returning error when calling from bpf_xxx_storage_delete() helpers in NMI. Note that, it is still possible to deadlock through reentrant. A full mitigation requires returning error when irqs_disabled() is true, which, however is too heavy-handed for bpf_xxx_storage_delete(). The long-term solution requires _nolock versions of call_rcu. Another possible solution is to defer the free through irq_work [0], but it would grow the size of selem, which is non-ideal. The check is only needed in bpf_selem_unlink(), which is used by helpers and syscalls. bpf_selem_unlink_nofail() is fine as it is called during map and owner tear down that nev...
CVE-2026-53106
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Do not allow deleting local storage in NMI Currently, local storage may deadlock when deferring freeing selem or local storage through kfree_rcu(), call_rcu() or call_rcu_tasks_trace() in NMI or reentrant. Since deleting selem in NMI is an unlikely use case, partially mitigate it by returning error when calling from bpf_xxx_storage_delete() helpers in NMI. Note that, it is still possible to deadlock through reentrant. A full mitigation requires returning error when irqs_disabled() is true, which, however is too heavy-handed for bpf_xxx_storage_delete(). The long-term solution requires _nolock versions of call_rcu. Another possible solution is to defer the free through irq_work [0], but it would grow the size of selem, which is non-ideal. The check is only needed in bpf_selem_unlink(), which is used by helpers and syscalls. bpf_selem_unlink_nofail() is fine as it is called during map and owner tear down that ne
CVE-2026-53106
bpf: Do not allow deleting local storage in NMI
CVE-2026-53106
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: b ...
GHSA-8c24-7wp3-q8gp
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Do not allow deleting local storage in NMI Currently, local storage may deadlock when deferring freeing selem or local storage through kfree_rcu(), call_rcu() or call_rcu_tasks_trace() in NMI or reentrant. Since deleting selem in NMI is an unlikely use case, partially mitigate it by returning error when calling from bpf_xxx_storage_delete() helpers in NMI. Note that, it is still possible to deadlock through reentrant. A full mitigation requires returning error when irqs_disabled() is true, which, however is too heavy-handed for bpf_xxx_storage_delete(). The long-term solution requires _nolock versions of call_rcu. Another possible solution is to defer the free through irq_work [0], but it would grow the size of selem, which is non-ideal. The check is only needed in bpf_selem_unlink(), which is used by helpers and syscalls. bpf_selem_unlink_nofail() is fine as it is called during map and owner tear down that...
Уязвимостей на страницу
Уязвимость | CVSS | EPSS | Опубликовано | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2026-53106 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Do not allow deleting local storage in NMI Currently, local storage may deadlock when deferring freeing selem or local storage through kfree_rcu(), call_rcu() or call_rcu_tasks_trace() in NMI or reentrant. Since deleting selem in NMI is an unlikely use case, partially mitigate it by returning error when calling from bpf_xxx_storage_delete() helpers in NMI. Note that, it is still possible to deadlock through reentrant. A full mitigation requires returning error when irqs_disabled() is true, which, however is too heavy-handed for bpf_xxx_storage_delete(). The long-term solution requires _nolock versions of call_rcu. Another possible solution is to defer the free through irq_work [0], but it would grow the size of selem, which is non-ideal. The check is only needed in bpf_selem_unlink(), which is used by helpers and syscalls. bpf_selem_unlink_nofail() is fine as it is called during map and owner tear down that nev... | 0% Низкий | около 1 месяца назад | ||
CVE-2026-53106 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Do not allow deleting local storage in NMI Currently, local storage may deadlock when deferring freeing selem or local storage through kfree_rcu(), call_rcu() or call_rcu_tasks_trace() in NMI or reentrant. Since deleting selem in NMI is an unlikely use case, partially mitigate it by returning error when calling from bpf_xxx_storage_delete() helpers in NMI. Note that, it is still possible to deadlock through reentrant. A full mitigation requires returning error when irqs_disabled() is true, which, however is too heavy-handed for bpf_xxx_storage_delete(). The long-term solution requires _nolock versions of call_rcu. Another possible solution is to defer the free through irq_work [0], but it would grow the size of selem, which is non-ideal. The check is only needed in bpf_selem_unlink(), which is used by helpers and syscalls. bpf_selem_unlink_nofail() is fine as it is called during map and owner tear down that nev... | CVSS3: 5.5 | 0% Низкий | около 1 месяца назад | |
CVE-2026-53106 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Do not allow deleting local storage in NMI Currently, local storage may deadlock when deferring freeing selem or local storage through kfree_rcu(), call_rcu() or call_rcu_tasks_trace() in NMI or reentrant. Since deleting selem in NMI is an unlikely use case, partially mitigate it by returning error when calling from bpf_xxx_storage_delete() helpers in NMI. Note that, it is still possible to deadlock through reentrant. A full mitigation requires returning error when irqs_disabled() is true, which, however is too heavy-handed for bpf_xxx_storage_delete(). The long-term solution requires _nolock versions of call_rcu. Another possible solution is to defer the free through irq_work [0], but it would grow the size of selem, which is non-ideal. The check is only needed in bpf_selem_unlink(), which is used by helpers and syscalls. bpf_selem_unlink_nofail() is fine as it is called during map and owner tear down that ne | 0% Низкий | около 1 месяца назад | ||
CVE-2026-53106 bpf: Do not allow deleting local storage in NMI | 0% Низкий | около 1 месяца назад | ||
CVE-2026-53106 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: b ... | 0% Низкий | около 1 месяца назад | ||
GHSA-8c24-7wp3-q8gp In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Do not allow deleting local storage in NMI Currently, local storage may deadlock when deferring freeing selem or local storage through kfree_rcu(), call_rcu() or call_rcu_tasks_trace() in NMI or reentrant. Since deleting selem in NMI is an unlikely use case, partially mitigate it by returning error when calling from bpf_xxx_storage_delete() helpers in NMI. Note that, it is still possible to deadlock through reentrant. A full mitigation requires returning error when irqs_disabled() is true, which, however is too heavy-handed for bpf_xxx_storage_delete(). The long-term solution requires _nolock versions of call_rcu. Another possible solution is to defer the free through irq_work [0], but it would grow the size of selem, which is non-ideal. The check is only needed in bpf_selem_unlink(), which is used by helpers and syscalls. bpf_selem_unlink_nofail() is fine as it is called during map and owner tear down that... | 0% Низкий | около 1 месяца назад |
Уязвимостей на страницу