<?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>Wed, 30 Sep 2026 03:37:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2026-74305 — bpf: Tighten cgroup storage cookie checks for prog arrays</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-74305</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;bpf: Tighten cgroup storage cookie checks for prog arrays&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The fix in commit abad3d0bad72 (&amp;#34;bpf: Fix oob access in cgroup local
storage&amp;#34;) is still incomplete. The prog-array compatibility check
treats a program with no cgroup storage as compatible with any stored
storage cookie. This allows a storage-less program to bridge a tail
call chain between an entry program and a storage-using callee even
though cgroup local storage at runtime still follows the caller&amp;#39;s
context, that is, A -&amp;gt; B(no storage) -&amp;gt; C(storage) path.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Requiring exact cookie equality would break the legitimate case of a
storage-less leaf program being tail called from a storage-using one.
Instead, only accept a zero storage cookie if the program cannot
perform tail calls itself. This keeps A -&amp;gt; B(no storage) working
while rejecting the A -&amp;gt; B(no storage) -&amp;gt; C(storage) bridge.&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;bpf: Tighten cgroup storage cookie checks for prog arrays&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The fix in commit abad3d0bad72 (&amp;#34;bpf: Fix oob access in cgroup local
storage&amp;#34;) is still incomplete. The prog-array compatibility check
treats a program with no cgroup storage as compatible with any stored
storage cookie. This allows a storage-less program to bridge a tail
call chain between an entry program and a storage-using callee even
though cgroup local storage at runtime still follows the caller&amp;#39;s
context, that is, A -&amp;gt; B(no storage) -&amp;gt; C(storage) path.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Requiring exact cookie equality would break the legitimate case of a
storage-less leaf program being tail called from a storage-using one.
Instead, only accept a zero storage cookie if the program cannot
perform tail calls itself. This keeps A -&amp;gt; B(no storage) working
while rejecting the A -&amp;gt; B(no storage) -&amp;gt; C(storage) bridge.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-74305</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
