GHSA-887M-4QRH-HJQ5

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-25 12:30 – Updated: 2026-03-25 12:30
VLAI?
Details

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

bpf, arm64: Force 8-byte alignment for JIT buffer to prevent atomic tearing

struct bpf_plt contains a u64 target field. Currently, the BPF JIT allocator requests an alignment of 4 bytes (sizeof(u32)) for the JIT buffer.

Because the base address of the JIT buffer can be 4-byte aligned (e.g., ending in 0x4 or 0xc), the relative padding logic in build_plt() fails to ensure that target lands on an 8-byte boundary.

This leads to two issues: 1. UBSAN reports misaligned-access warnings when dereferencing the structure. 2. More critically, target is updated concurrently via WRITE_ONCE() in bpf_arch_text_poke() while the JIT'd code executes ldr. On arm64, 64-bit loads/stores are only guaranteed to be single-copy atomic if they are 64-bit aligned. A misaligned target risks a torn read, causing the JIT to jump to a corrupted address.

Fix this by increasing the allocation alignment requirement to 8 bytes (sizeof(u64)) in bpf_jit_binary_pack_alloc(). This anchors the base of the JIT buffer to an 8-byte boundary, allowing the relative padding math in build_plt() to correctly align the target field.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-23383"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-03-25T11:16:38Z",
    "severity": null
  },
  "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nbpf, arm64: Force 8-byte alignment for JIT buffer to prevent atomic tearing\n\nstruct bpf_plt contains a u64 target field. Currently, the BPF JIT\nallocator requests an alignment of 4 bytes (sizeof(u32)) for the JIT\nbuffer.\n\nBecause the base address of the JIT buffer can be 4-byte aligned (e.g.,\nending in 0x4 or 0xc), the relative padding logic in build_plt() fails\nto ensure that target lands on an 8-byte boundary.\n\nThis leads to two issues:\n1. UBSAN reports misaligned-access warnings when dereferencing the\n   structure.\n2. More critically, target is updated concurrently via WRITE_ONCE() in\n   bpf_arch_text_poke() while the JIT\u0027d code executes ldr. On arm64,\n   64-bit loads/stores are only guaranteed to be single-copy atomic if\n   they are 64-bit aligned. A misaligned target risks a torn read,\n   causing the JIT to jump to a corrupted address.\n\nFix this by increasing the allocation alignment requirement to 8 bytes\n(sizeof(u64)) in bpf_jit_binary_pack_alloc(). This anchors the base of\nthe JIT buffer to an 8-byte boundary, allowing the relative padding math\nin build_plt() to correctly align the target field.",
  "id": "GHSA-887m-4qrh-hjq5",
  "modified": "2026-03-25T12:30:24Z",
  "published": "2026-03-25T12:30:24Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-23383"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/519b1ad91de5bf7a496f2b858e9212db6328e1de"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/66959ed481a474eaae278c7f6860a2a9b188a4d6"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/80ad264da02cc4aee718e799c2b79f0f834673dc"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ef06fd16d48704eac868441d98d4ef083d8f3d07"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

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.


Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…