Bug 2484462 (CVE-2026-40290) - CVE-2026-40290 optee_os: privilege escalation due to user-after-free race condition in shared memory teardown
Summary: CVE-2026-40290 optee_os: privilege escalation due to user-after-free race con...
Keywords:
Status: NEW
Alias: CVE-2026-40290
Product: Security Response
Classification: Other
Component: vulnerability
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
high
high
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Product Security
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 2484487
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2026-06-03 18:02 UTC by OSIDB Bzimport
Modified: 2026-06-08 11:14 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description OSIDB Bzimport 2026-06-03 18:02:36 UTC
OP-TEE is a Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) designed as companion to a non-secure Linux kernel running on Arm; Cortex-A cores using the TrustZone technology. Starting in version 3.16.0 and prior to 4.11.0, a user-after-free (UAF) race condition exists in the shared memory teardown logic of FF-A  within OP-TEE SPMC/SP flows. This only applies when OP-TEE is configured as an SPMC for S-EL0 SPs, that is, with `CFG_SECURE_PARTITION=y`. The function `sp_mem_remove()`, responsible for freeing entries in `smem->receivers` and `smem->regions`, fails to acquire the global `sp_mem_lock` before performing the `free()` operations. Concurrently, other code paths, such as `sp_mem_get_receiver()`, iterate over these same lists without holding a lock, or, like `sp_mem_is_shared()`, iterate while holding the lock but are not serialized against the unprotected `free()` in `sp_mem_remove()`. This creates a cross-thread race where a thread iterating the list can acquire a pointer to an entry (e.g., `struct sp_mem_map_region` or `struct sp_mem_receiver`), and then another thread calls `sp_mem_remove()`, freeing the object. When the first thread resumes and dereferences the pointer, it results in a Use-After-Free vulnerability. Version 4.11.0 fixes the issue.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.