CVE-2025-38279 (GCVE-0-2025-38279)

Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2025-07-10 07:41 – Updated: 2026-05-23 15:59
VLAI
Title
bpf: Do not include stack ptr register in precision backtracking bookkeeping
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Do not include stack ptr register in precision backtracking bookkeeping Yi Lai reported an issue ([1]) where the following warning appears in kernel dmesg: [ 60.643604] verifier backtracking bug [ 60.643635] WARNING: CPU: 10 PID: 2315 at kernel/bpf/verifier.c:4302 __mark_chain_precision+0x3a6c/0x3e10 [ 60.648428] Modules linked in: bpf_testmod(OE) [ 60.650471] CPU: 10 UID: 0 PID: 2315 Comm: test_progs Tainted: G OE 6.15.0-rc4-gef11287f8289-dirty #327 PREEMPT(full) [ 60.654385] Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE [ 60.656682] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a1990b-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 [ 60.660475] RIP: 0010:__mark_chain_precision+0x3a6c/0x3e10 [ 60.662814] Code: 5a 30 84 89 ea e8 c4 d9 01 00 80 3d 3e 7d d8 04 00 0f 85 60 fa ff ff c6 05 31 7d d8 04 01 48 c7 c7 00 58 30 84 e8 c4 06 a5 ff <0f> 0b e9 46 fa ff ff 48 ... [ 60.668720] RSP: 0018:ffff888116cc7298 EFLAGS: 00010246 [ 60.671075] RAX: 54d70e82dfd31900 RBX: ffff888115b65e20 RCX: 0000000000000000 [ 60.673659] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000000000000004 RDI: 00000000ffffffff [ 60.676241] RBP: 0000000000000400 R08: ffff8881f6f23bd3 R09: 1ffff1103ede477a [ 60.678787] R10: dffffc0000000000 R11: ffffed103ede477b R12: ffff888115b60ae8 [ 60.681420] R13: 1ffff11022b6cbc4 R14: 00000000fffffff2 R15: 0000000000000001 [ 60.684030] FS: 00007fc2aedd80c0(0000) GS:ffff88826fa8a000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 60.686837] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 60.689027] CR2: 000056325369e000 CR3: 000000011088b002 CR4: 0000000000370ef0 [ 60.691623] Call Trace: [ 60.692821] <TASK> [ 60.693960] ? __pfx_verbose+0x10/0x10 [ 60.695656] ? __pfx_disasm_kfunc_name+0x10/0x10 [ 60.697495] check_cond_jmp_op+0x16f7/0x39b0 [ 60.699237] do_check+0x58fa/0xab10 ... Further analysis shows the warning is at line 4302 as below: 4294 /* static subprog call instruction, which 4295 * means that we are exiting current subprog, 4296 * so only r1-r5 could be still requested as 4297 * precise, r0 and r6-r10 or any stack slot in 4298 * the current frame should be zero by now 4299 */ 4300 if (bt_reg_mask(bt) & ~BPF_REGMASK_ARGS) { 4301 verbose(env, "BUG regs %x\n", bt_reg_mask(bt)); 4302 WARN_ONCE(1, "verifier backtracking bug"); 4303 return -EFAULT; 4304 } With the below test (also in the next patch): __used __naked static void __bpf_jmp_r10(void) { asm volatile ( "r2 = 2314885393468386424 ll;" "goto +0;" "if r2 <= r10 goto +3;" "if r1 >= -1835016 goto +0;" "if r2 <= 8 goto +0;" "if r3 <= 0 goto +0;" "exit;" ::: __clobber_all); } SEC("?raw_tp") __naked void bpf_jmp_r10(void) { asm volatile ( "r3 = 0 ll;" "call __bpf_jmp_r10;" "r0 = 0;" "exit;" ::: __clobber_all); } The following is the verifier failure log: 0: (18) r3 = 0x0 ; R3_w=0 2: (85) call pc+2 caller: R10=fp0 callee: frame1: R1=ctx() R3_w=0 R10=fp0 5: frame1: R1=ctx() R3_w=0 R10=fp0 ; asm volatile (" \ @ verifier_precision.c:184 5: (18) r2 = 0x20202000256c6c78 ; frame1: R2_w=0x20202000256c6c78 7: (05) goto pc+0 8: (bd) if r2 <= r10 goto pc+3 ; frame1: R2_w=0x20202000256c6c78 R10=fp0 9: (35) if r1 >= 0xffe3fff8 goto pc+0 ; frame1: R1=ctx() 10: (b5) if r2 <= 0x8 goto pc+0 mark_precise: frame1: last_idx 10 first_idx 0 subseq_idx -1 mark_precise: frame1: regs=r2 stack= before 9: (35) if r1 >= 0xffe3fff8 goto pc+0 mark_precise: frame1: regs=r2 stack= before 8: (bd) if r2 <= r10 goto pc+3 mark_preci ---truncated---
Severity
7.8 (High)
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Assigner
References
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
Linux Linux Affected: 407958a0e980b9e1842ab87b5a1040521e1e24e9 , < 4265682c29c92f52c0da6fad5a79b5801462c8de (git)
Affected: 407958a0e980b9e1842ab87b5a1040521e1e24e9 , < ac49b7560b4b08b1e4043a29214cc7ad77644c00 (git)
Affected: 407958a0e980b9e1842ab87b5a1040521e1e24e9 , < e2d2115e56c4a02377189bfc3a9a7933552a7b0f (git)
Affected: fc2778c42f99c7de52fc004157b3c3ee4dcc208a (git)
Affected: 6.4.4 , < 6.5 (semver)
Create a notification for this product.
Linux Linux Affected: 6.5
Unaffected: 0 , < 6.5 (semver)
Unaffected: 6.12.37 , ≤ 6.12.* (semver)
Unaffected: 6.15.3 , ≤ 6.15.* (semver)
Unaffected: 6.16 , ≤ * (original_commit_for_fix)
Create a notification for this product.
Show details on NVD website
To clipboard 

{
  "containers": {
    "cna": {
      "affected": [
        {
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "product": "Linux",
          "programFiles": [
            "include/linux/bpf_verifier.h",
            "kernel/bpf/verifier.c"
          ],
          "repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git",
          "vendor": "Linux",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "4265682c29c92f52c0da6fad5a79b5801462c8de",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "407958a0e980b9e1842ab87b5a1040521e1e24e9",
              "versionType": "git"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "ac49b7560b4b08b1e4043a29214cc7ad77644c00",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "407958a0e980b9e1842ab87b5a1040521e1e24e9",
              "versionType": "git"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "e2d2115e56c4a02377189bfc3a9a7933552a7b0f",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "407958a0e980b9e1842ab87b5a1040521e1e24e9",
              "versionType": "git"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "fc2778c42f99c7de52fc004157b3c3ee4dcc208a",
              "versionType": "git"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "6.5",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "6.4.4",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "defaultStatus": "affected",
          "product": "Linux",
          "programFiles": [
            "include/linux/bpf_verifier.h",
            "kernel/bpf/verifier.c"
          ],
          "repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git",
          "vendor": "Linux",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "6.5"
            },
            {
              "lessThan": "6.5",
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "6.12.*",
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "6.12.37",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "6.15.*",
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "6.15.3",
              "versionType": "semver"
            },
            {
              "lessThanOrEqual": "*",
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "6.16",
              "versionType": "original_commit_for_fix"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "cpeApplicability": [
        {
          "nodes": [
            {
              "cpeMatch": [
                {
                  "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
                  "versionEndExcluding": "6.12.37",
                  "versionStartIncluding": "6.5",
                  "vulnerable": true
                },
                {
                  "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
                  "versionEndExcluding": "6.15.3",
                  "versionStartIncluding": "6.5",
                  "vulnerable": true
                },
                {
                  "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
                  "versionEndExcluding": "6.16",
                  "versionStartIncluding": "6.5",
                  "vulnerable": true
                },
                {
                  "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
                  "versionStartIncluding": "6.4.4",
                  "vulnerable": true
                }
              ],
              "negate": false,
              "operator": "OR"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "descriptions": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nbpf: Do not include stack ptr register in precision backtracking bookkeeping\n\nYi Lai reported an issue ([1]) where the following warning appears\nin kernel dmesg:\n  [   60.643604] verifier backtracking bug\n  [   60.643635] WARNING: CPU: 10 PID: 2315 at kernel/bpf/verifier.c:4302 __mark_chain_precision+0x3a6c/0x3e10\n  [   60.648428] Modules linked in: bpf_testmod(OE)\n  [   60.650471] CPU: 10 UID: 0 PID: 2315 Comm: test_progs Tainted: G           OE       6.15.0-rc4-gef11287f8289-dirty #327 PREEMPT(full)\n  [   60.654385] Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE\n  [   60.656682] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a1990b-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014\n  [   60.660475] RIP: 0010:__mark_chain_precision+0x3a6c/0x3e10\n  [   60.662814] Code: 5a 30 84 89 ea e8 c4 d9 01 00 80 3d 3e 7d d8 04 00 0f 85 60 fa ff ff c6 05 31 7d d8 04\n                       01 48 c7 c7 00 58 30 84 e8 c4 06 a5 ff \u003c0f\u003e 0b e9 46 fa ff ff 48 ...\n  [   60.668720] RSP: 0018:ffff888116cc7298 EFLAGS: 00010246\n  [   60.671075] RAX: 54d70e82dfd31900 RBX: ffff888115b65e20 RCX: 0000000000000000\n  [   60.673659] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000000000000004 RDI: 00000000ffffffff\n  [   60.676241] RBP: 0000000000000400 R08: ffff8881f6f23bd3 R09: 1ffff1103ede477a\n  [   60.678787] R10: dffffc0000000000 R11: ffffed103ede477b R12: ffff888115b60ae8\n  [   60.681420] R13: 1ffff11022b6cbc4 R14: 00000000fffffff2 R15: 0000000000000001\n  [   60.684030] FS:  00007fc2aedd80c0(0000) GS:ffff88826fa8a000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000\n  [   60.686837] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033\n  [   60.689027] CR2: 000056325369e000 CR3: 000000011088b002 CR4: 0000000000370ef0\n  [   60.691623] Call Trace:\n  [   60.692821]  \u003cTASK\u003e\n  [   60.693960]  ? __pfx_verbose+0x10/0x10\n  [   60.695656]  ? __pfx_disasm_kfunc_name+0x10/0x10\n  [   60.697495]  check_cond_jmp_op+0x16f7/0x39b0\n  [   60.699237]  do_check+0x58fa/0xab10\n  ...\n\nFurther analysis shows the warning is at line 4302 as below:\n\n  4294                 /* static subprog call instruction, which\n  4295                  * means that we are exiting current subprog,\n  4296                  * so only r1-r5 could be still requested as\n  4297                  * precise, r0 and r6-r10 or any stack slot in\n  4298                  * the current frame should be zero by now\n  4299                  */\n  4300                 if (bt_reg_mask(bt) \u0026 ~BPF_REGMASK_ARGS) {\n  4301                         verbose(env, \"BUG regs %x\\n\", bt_reg_mask(bt));\n  4302                         WARN_ONCE(1, \"verifier backtracking bug\");\n  4303                         return -EFAULT;\n  4304                 }\n\nWith the below test (also in the next patch):\n  __used __naked static void __bpf_jmp_r10(void)\n  {\n\tasm volatile (\n\t\"r2 = 2314885393468386424 ll;\"\n\t\"goto +0;\"\n\t\"if r2 \u003c= r10 goto +3;\"\n\t\"if r1 \u003e= -1835016 goto +0;\"\n\t\"if r2 \u003c= 8 goto +0;\"\n\t\"if r3 \u003c= 0 goto +0;\"\n\t\"exit;\"\n\t::: __clobber_all);\n  }\n\n  SEC(\"?raw_tp\")\n  __naked void bpf_jmp_r10(void)\n  {\n\tasm volatile (\n\t\"r3 = 0 ll;\"\n\t\"call __bpf_jmp_r10;\"\n\t\"r0 = 0;\"\n\t\"exit;\"\n\t::: __clobber_all);\n  }\n\nThe following is the verifier failure log:\n  0: (18) r3 = 0x0                      ; R3_w=0\n  2: (85) call pc+2\n  caller:\n   R10=fp0\n  callee:\n   frame1: R1=ctx() R3_w=0 R10=fp0\n  5: frame1: R1=ctx() R3_w=0 R10=fp0\n  ; asm volatile (\"                                 \\ @ verifier_precision.c:184\n  5: (18) r2 = 0x20202000256c6c78       ; frame1: R2_w=0x20202000256c6c78\n  7: (05) goto pc+0\n  8: (bd) if r2 \u003c= r10 goto pc+3        ; frame1: R2_w=0x20202000256c6c78 R10=fp0\n  9: (35) if r1 \u003e= 0xffe3fff8 goto pc+0         ; frame1: R1=ctx()\n  10: (b5) if r2 \u003c= 0x8 goto pc+0\n  mark_precise: frame1: last_idx 10 first_idx 0 subseq_idx -1\n  mark_precise: frame1: regs=r2 stack= before 9: (35) if r1 \u003e= 0xffe3fff8 goto pc+0\n  mark_precise: frame1: regs=r2 stack= before 8: (bd) if r2 \u003c= r10 goto pc+3\n  mark_preci\n---truncated---"
        }
      ],
      "providerMetadata": {
        "dateUpdated": "2026-05-23T15:59:20.262Z",
        "orgId": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
        "shortName": "Linux"
      },
      "references": [
        {
          "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4265682c29c92f52c0da6fad5a79b5801462c8de"
        },
        {
          "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ac49b7560b4b08b1e4043a29214cc7ad77644c00"
        },
        {
          "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e2d2115e56c4a02377189bfc3a9a7933552a7b0f"
        }
      ],
      "title": "bpf: Do not include stack ptr register in precision backtracking bookkeeping",
      "x_generator": {
        "engine": "bippy-1.2.0"
      }
    }
  },
  "cveMetadata": {
    "assignerOrgId": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
    "assignerShortName": "Linux",
    "cveId": "CVE-2025-38279",
    "datePublished": "2025-07-10T07:41:58.184Z",
    "dateReserved": "2025-04-16T04:51:23.998Z",
    "dateUpdated": "2026-05-23T15:59:20.262Z",
    "state": "PUBLISHED"
  },
  "dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
  "dataVersion": "5.2",
  "vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
    "epss": {
      "cve": "CVE-2025-38279",
      "date": "2026-06-19",
      "epss": "0.00163",
      "percentile": "0.05856"
    },
    "nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2025-38279\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67\",\"published\":\"2025-07-10T08:15:26.240\",\"lastModified\":\"2026-03-17T13:38:01.027\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Analyzed\",\"cveTags\":[],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\\n\\nbpf: Do not include stack ptr register in precision backtracking bookkeeping\\n\\nYi Lai reported an issue ([1]) where the following warning appears\\nin kernel dmesg:\\n  [   60.643604] verifier backtracking bug\\n  [   60.643635] WARNING: CPU: 10 PID: 2315 at kernel/bpf/verifier.c:4302 __mark_chain_precision+0x3a6c/0x3e10\\n  [   60.648428] Modules linked in: bpf_testmod(OE)\\n  [   60.650471] CPU: 10 UID: 0 PID: 2315 Comm: test_progs Tainted: G           OE       6.15.0-rc4-gef11287f8289-dirty #327 PREEMPT(full)\\n  [   60.654385] Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE\\n  [   60.656682] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a1990b-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014\\n  [   60.660475] RIP: 0010:__mark_chain_precision+0x3a6c/0x3e10\\n  [   60.662814] Code: 5a 30 84 89 ea e8 c4 d9 01 00 80 3d 3e 7d d8 04 00 0f 85 60 fa ff ff c6 05 31 7d d8 04\\n                       01 48 c7 c7 00 58 30 84 e8 c4 06 a5 ff \u003c0f\u003e 0b e9 46 fa ff ff 48 ...\\n  [   60.668720] RSP: 0018:ffff888116cc7298 EFLAGS: 00010246\\n  [   60.671075] RAX: 54d70e82dfd31900 RBX: ffff888115b65e20 RCX: 0000000000000000\\n  [   60.673659] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000000000000004 RDI: 00000000ffffffff\\n  [   60.676241] RBP: 0000000000000400 R08: ffff8881f6f23bd3 R09: 1ffff1103ede477a\\n  [   60.678787] R10: dffffc0000000000 R11: ffffed103ede477b R12: ffff888115b60ae8\\n  [   60.681420] R13: 1ffff11022b6cbc4 R14: 00000000fffffff2 R15: 0000000000000001\\n  [   60.684030] FS:  00007fc2aedd80c0(0000) GS:ffff88826fa8a000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000\\n  [   60.686837] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033\\n  [   60.689027] CR2: 000056325369e000 CR3: 000000011088b002 CR4: 0000000000370ef0\\n  [   60.691623] Call Trace:\\n  [   60.692821]  \u003cTASK\u003e\\n  [   60.693960]  ? __pfx_verbose+0x10/0x10\\n  [   60.695656]  ? __pfx_disasm_kfunc_name+0x10/0x10\\n  [   60.697495]  check_cond_jmp_op+0x16f7/0x39b0\\n  [   60.699237]  do_check+0x58fa/0xab10\\n  ...\\n\\nFurther analysis shows the warning is at line 4302 as below:\\n\\n  4294                 /* static subprog call instruction, which\\n  4295                  * means that we are exiting current subprog,\\n  4296                  * so only r1-r5 could be still requested as\\n  4297                  * precise, r0 and r6-r10 or any stack slot in\\n  4298                  * the current frame should be zero by now\\n  4299                  */\\n  4300                 if (bt_reg_mask(bt) \u0026 ~BPF_REGMASK_ARGS) {\\n  4301                         verbose(env, \\\"BUG regs %x\\\\n\\\", bt_reg_mask(bt));\\n  4302                         WARN_ONCE(1, \\\"verifier backtracking bug\\\");\\n  4303                         return -EFAULT;\\n  4304                 }\\n\\nWith the below test (also in the next patch):\\n  __used __naked static void __bpf_jmp_r10(void)\\n  {\\n\\tasm volatile (\\n\\t\\\"r2 = 2314885393468386424 ll;\\\"\\n\\t\\\"goto +0;\\\"\\n\\t\\\"if r2 \u003c= r10 goto +3;\\\"\\n\\t\\\"if r1 \u003e= -1835016 goto +0;\\\"\\n\\t\\\"if r2 \u003c= 8 goto +0;\\\"\\n\\t\\\"if r3 \u003c= 0 goto +0;\\\"\\n\\t\\\"exit;\\\"\\n\\t::: __clobber_all);\\n  }\\n\\n  SEC(\\\"?raw_tp\\\")\\n  __naked void bpf_jmp_r10(void)\\n  {\\n\\tasm volatile (\\n\\t\\\"r3 = 0 ll;\\\"\\n\\t\\\"call __bpf_jmp_r10;\\\"\\n\\t\\\"r0 = 0;\\\"\\n\\t\\\"exit;\\\"\\n\\t::: __clobber_all);\\n  }\\n\\nThe following is the verifier failure log:\\n  0: (18) r3 = 0x0                      ; R3_w=0\\n  2: (85) call pc+2\\n  caller:\\n   R10=fp0\\n  callee:\\n   frame1: R1=ctx() R3_w=0 R10=fp0\\n  5: frame1: R1=ctx() R3_w=0 R10=fp0\\n  ; asm volatile (\\\"                                 \\\\ @ verifier_precision.c:184\\n  5: (18) r2 = 0x20202000256c6c78       ; frame1: R2_w=0x20202000256c6c78\\n  7: (05) goto pc+0\\n  8: (bd) if r2 \u003c= r10 goto pc+3        ; frame1: R2_w=0x20202000256c6c78 R10=fp0\\n  9: (35) if r1 \u003e= 0xffe3fff8 goto pc+0         ; frame1: R1=ctx()\\n  10: (b5) if r2 \u003c= 0x8 goto pc+0\\n  mark_precise: frame1: last_idx 10 first_idx 0 subseq_idx -1\\n  mark_precise: frame1: regs=r2 stack= before 9: (35) if r1 \u003e= 0xffe3fff8 goto pc+0\\n  mark_precise: frame1: regs=r2 stack= before 8: (bd) if r2 \u003c= r10 goto pc+3\\n  mark_preci\\n---truncated---\"},{\"lang\":\"es\",\"value\":\"En el kernel de Linux, se ha resuelto la siguiente vulnerabilidad: bpf: No incluir el registro ptr de pila en la contabilidad de retroceso de precisi\u00f3n Yi Lai inform\u00f3 de un problema ([1]) en el que aparece la siguiente advertencia en el dmesg del kernel: [ 60.643604] error de retroceso del verificador [ 60.643635] ADVERTENCIA: CPU: 10 PID: 2315 at kernel/bpf/verifier.c:4302 __mark_chain_precision+0x3a6c/0x3e10 [ 60.648428] Modules linked in: bpf_testmod(OE) [ 60.650471] CPU: 10 UID: 0 PID: 2315 Comm: test_progs Tainted: G OE 6.15.0-rc4-gef11287f8289-dirty #327 PREEMPT(full) [ 60.654385] Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE [ 60.656682] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a1990b-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 [ 60.660475] RIP: 0010:__mark_chain_precision+0x3a6c/0x3e10 [ 60.662814] Code: 5a 30 84 89 ea e8 c4 d9 01 00 80 3d 3e 7d d8 04 00 0f 85 60 fa ff ff c6 05 31 7d d8 04 01 48 c7 c7 00 58 30 84 e8 c4 06 a5 ff \u0026lt;0f\u0026gt; 0b e9 46 fa ff ff 48 ... [ 60.668720] RSP: 0018:ffff888116cc7298 EFLAGS: 00010246 [ 60.671075] RAX: 54d70e82dfd31900 RBX: ffff888115b65e20 RCX: 0000000000000000 [ 60.673659] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000000000000004 RDI: 00000000ffffffff [ 60.676241] RBP: 0000000000000400 R08: ffff8881f6f23bd3 R09: 1ffff1103ede477a [ 60.678787] R10: dffffc0000000000 R11: ffffed103ede477b R12: ffff888115b60ae8 [ 60.681420] R13: 1ffff11022b6cbc4 R14: 00000000fffffff2 R15: 0000000000000001 [ 60.684030] FS: 00007fc2aedd80c0(0000) GS:ffff88826fa8a000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 60.686837] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 60.689027] CR2: 000056325369e000 CR3: 000000011088b002 CR4: 0000000000370ef0 [ 60.691623] Call Trace: [ 60.692821]  [ 60.693960] ? __pfx_verbose+0x10/0x10 [ 60.695656] ? __pfx_disasm_kfunc_name+0x10/0x10 [ 60.697495] check_cond_jmp_op+0x16f7/0x39b0 [ 60.699237] do_check+0x58fa/0xab10 ... Further analysis shows the warning is at line 4302 as below: 4294 /* static subprog call instruction, which 4295 * means that we are exiting current subprog, 4296 * so only r1-r5 could be still requested as 4297 * precise, r0 and r6-r10 or any stack slot in 4298 * the current frame should be zero by now 4299 */ 4300 if (bt_reg_mask(bt) \u0026amp; ~BPF_REGMASK_ARGS) { 4301 verbose(env, \\\"BUG regs %x\\\\n\\\", bt_reg_mask(bt)); 4302 WARN_ONCE(1, \\\"verifier backtracking bug\\\"); 4303 return -EFAULT; 4304 } With the below test (also in the next patch): __used __naked static void __bpf_jmp_r10(void) { asm volatile ( \\\"r2 = 2314885393468386424 ll;\\\" \\\"goto +0;\\\" \\\"if r2 \u0026lt;= r10 goto +3;\\\" \\\"if r1 \u0026gt;= -1835016 goto +0;\\\" \\\"if r2 \u0026lt;= 8 goto +0;\\\" \\\"if r3 \u0026lt;= 0 goto +0;\\\" \\\"exit;\\\" ::: __clobber_all); } SEC(\\\"?raw_tp\\\") __naked void bpf_jmp_r10(void) { asm volatile ( \\\"r3 = 0 ll;\\\" \\\"call __bpf_jmp_r10;\\\" \\\"r0 = 0;\\\" \\\"exit;\\\" ::: __clobber_all); } The following is the verifier failure log: 0: (18) r3 = 0x0 ; R3_w=0 2: (85) call pc+2 caller: R10=fp0 callee: frame1: R1=ctx() R3_w=0 R10=fp0 5: frame1: R1=ctx() R3_w=0 R10=fp0 ; asm volatile (\\\" \\\\ @ verifier_precision.c:184 5: (18) r2 = 0x20202000256c6c78 ; frame1: R2_w=0x20202000256c6c78 7: (05) goto pc+0 8: (bd) if r2 \u0026lt;= r10 goto pc+3 ; frame1: R2_w=0x20202000256c6c78 R10=fp0 9: (35) if r1 \u0026gt;= 0xffe3fff8 goto pc+0 ; frame1: R1=ctx() 10: (b5) if r2 \u0026lt;= 0x8 goto pc+0 mark_precise: frame1: last_idx 10 first_idx 0 subseq_idx -1 mark_precise: frame1: regs=r2 stack= before 9: (35) if r1 \u0026gt;= 0xffe3fff8 goto pc+0 mark_precise: frame1: regs=r2 stack= before 8: (bd) if r2 \u0026lt;= r10 goto pc+3 mark_preci ---truncado---\"}],\"metrics\":{\"cvssMetricV31\":[{\"source\":\"nvd@nist.gov\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H\",\"baseScore\":7.8,\"baseSeverity\":\"HIGH\",\"attackVector\":\"LOCAL\",\"attackComplexity\":\"LOW\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"LOW\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"scope\":\"UNCHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"integrityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"HIGH\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":1.8,\"impactScore\":5.9}]},\"weaknesses\":[{\"source\":\"nvd@nist.gov\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"NVD-CWE-noinfo\"}]}],\"configurations\":[{\"nodes\":[{\"operator\":\"OR\",\"negate\":false,\"cpeMatch\":[{\"vulnerable\":true,\"criteria\":\"cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*\",\"versionStartIncluding\":\"6.4.4\",\"versionEndExcluding\":\"6.12.37\",\"matchCriteriaId\":\"695DA846-7592-49C3-B1F6-0094581E4BD7\"},{\"vulnerable\":true,\"criteria\":\"cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*\",\"versionStartIncluding\":\"6.13\",\"versionEndExcluding\":\"6.15.3\",\"matchCriteriaId\":\"0541C761-BD5E-4C1A-8432-83B375D7EB92\"}]}]}],\"references\":[{\"url\":\"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4265682c29c92f52c0da6fad5a79b5801462c8de\",\"source\":\"416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67\",\"tags\":[\"Patch\"]},{\"url\":\"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ac49b7560b4b08b1e4043a29214cc7ad77644c00\",\"source\":\"416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67\",\"tags\":[\"Patch\"]},{\"url\":\"https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e2d2115e56c4a02377189bfc3a9a7933552a7b0f\",\"source\":\"416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67\",\"tags\":[\"Patch\"]}]}}"
  }
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.





Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.


Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.