Bug 2541092 (CVE-2026-98041)
| Summary: | CVE-2026-98041 kernel: bpf: Don't predict JMP32 pointer vs zero comparisons | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Other] Security Response | Reporter: | OSIDB Bzimport <bzimport> |
| Component: | vulnerability | Assignee: | Product Security DevOps Team <prodsec-dev> |
| Status: | NEW --- | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | unspecified | CC: | akhatavk, aos-team-art-private, asdas, dpaolell, jdelft, jupierce, lgarciaa, mbiarnes, ppalepu, ppostler, prdhamdh, rhel-process-autobot, sghai, sidsharm, suppawar, vlaad, watson-tool-maintainers |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Security |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | --- | |
| Doc Text: |
A flaw was found in the Linux kernel's Berkeley Packet Filter (BPF) verifier. The verifier incorrectly predicts that 32-bit conditional branch comparisons between a pointer and zero are always taken, failing to account for valid pointer values whose lower 32 bits can be zero. A local attacker could exploit this vulnerability by loading a specially crafted BPF program to bypass safety checks, potentially resulting in out-of-bounds kernel memory access and local privilege escalation.
|
Story Points: | --- |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | Type: | --- | |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Don't predict JMP32 pointer vs zero comparisons Consider the following program: r1 = map_value; /* low 32 bits are zero at runtime */ r6 = 0xdead000000000000; if w1 != 0 goto l1; l0: r1 += r6; r2 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 0); exit; l1: r6 = 0; goto l0; At the moment is_branch_taken() reports the jump as always taken, because it does not distinguish between BPF_JMP and BPF_JMP32 comparisons when processing 'if w1 != 0 ...'.