<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-09-29T11:58:53.403478+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@circl.lu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-68725</id>
    <title>CVE-2025-68725 — bpf: Do not let BPF test infra emit invalid GSO types to stack</title>
    <updated>2026-09-29T11:58:54.150543+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> Linux, Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP, Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518F-4 PN/DP MFP, Siemens SIPLUS S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 PN/DP MFP</p>
<p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p>
<p>bpf: Do not let BPF test infra emit invalid GSO types to stack</p>
<p>Yinhao et al. reported that their fuzzer tool was able to trigger a
skb_warn_bad_offload() from netif_skb_features() -&gt; gso_features_check().
When a BPF program - triggered via BPF test infra - pushes the packet
to the loopback device via bpf_clone_redirect() then mentioned offload
warning can be seen. GSO-related features are then rightfully disabled.</p>
<p>We get into this situation due to convert___skb_to_skb() setting
gso_segs and gso_size but not gso_type. Technically, it makes sense
that this warning triggers since the GSO properties are malformed due
to the gso_type. Potentially, the gso_type could be marked non-trustworthy
through setting it at least to SKB_GSO_DODGY without any other specific
assumptions, but that also feels wrong given we should not go further
into the GSO engine in the first place.</p>
<p>The checks were added in 121d57af308d ("gso: validate gso_type in GSO
handlers") because there were malicious (syzbot) senders that combine
a protocol with a non-matching gso_type. If we would want to drop such
packets, gso_features_check() currently only returns feature flags via
netif_skb_features(), so one location for potentially dropping such skbs
could be validate_xmit_unreadable_skb(), but then otoh it would be
an additional check in the fast-path for a very corner case. Given
bpf_clone_redirect() is the only place where BPF test infra…</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-68725"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
