<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2026 01:14:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2026-23198 — KVM: Don't clobber irqfd routing type when deassigning irqfd</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-23198</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;KVM: Don&amp;#39;t clobber irqfd routing type when deassigning irqfd&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When deassigning a KVM_IRQFD, don&amp;#39;t clobber the irqfd&amp;#39;s copy of the IRQ&amp;#39;s
routing entry as doing so breaks kvm_arch_irq_bypass_del_producer() on x86
and arm64, which explicitly look for KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_MSI.  Instead, to
handle a concurrent routing update, verify that the irqfd is still active
before consuming the routing information.  As evidenced by the x86 and
arm64 bugs, and another bug in kvm_arch_update_irqfd_routing() (see below),
clobbering the entry type without notifying arch code is surprising and
error prone.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As a bonus, checking that the irqfd is active provides a convenient
location for documenting _why_ KVM must not consume the routing entry for
an irqfd that is in the process of being deassigned: once the irqfd is
deleted from the list (which happens *before* the eventfd is detached), it
will no longer receive updates via kvm_irq_routing_update(), and so KVM
could deliver an event using stale routing information (relative to
KVM_SET_GSI_ROUTING returning to userspace).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As an even better bonus, explicitly checking for the irqfd being active
fixes a similar bug to the one the clobbering is trying to prevent: if an
irqfd is deactivated, and then its routing is changed,
kvm_irq_routing_update() won&amp;#39;t invoke kvm_arch_update_irqfd_routing()
(because the irqfd isn&amp;#39;t in the list).  And so if the irqfd is in bypass
mode, IRQs will continu…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;KVM: Don&amp;#39;t clobber irqfd routing type when deassigning irqfd&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When deassigning a KVM_IRQFD, don&amp;#39;t clobber the irqfd&amp;#39;s copy of the IRQ&amp;#39;s
routing entry as doing so breaks kvm_arch_irq_bypass_del_producer() on x86
and arm64, which explicitly look for KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_MSI.  Instead, to
handle a concurrent routing update, verify that the irqfd is still active
before consuming the routing information.  As evidenced by the x86 and
arm64 bugs, and another bug in kvm_arch_update_irqfd_routing() (see below),
clobbering the entry type without notifying arch code is surprising and
error prone.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As a bonus, checking that the irqfd is active provides a convenient
location for documenting _why_ KVM must not consume the routing entry for
an irqfd that is in the process of being deassigned: once the irqfd is
deleted from the list (which happens *before* the eventfd is detached), it
will no longer receive updates via kvm_irq_routing_update(), and so KVM
could deliver an event using stale routing information (relative to
KVM_SET_GSI_ROUTING returning to userspace).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As an even better bonus, explicitly checking for the irqfd being active
fixes a similar bug to the one the clobbering is trying to prevent: if an
irqfd is deactivated, and then its routing is changed,
kvm_irq_routing_update() won&amp;#39;t invoke kvm_arch_update_irqfd_routing()
(because the irqfd isn&amp;#39;t in the list).  And so if the irqfd is in bypass
mode, IRQs will continu…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-23198</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
