fkie_cve-2025-40123
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd
Published
2025-11-12 11:15
Modified
2025-11-12 16:19
Severity ?
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf: Enforce expected_attach_type for tailcall compatibility
Yinhao et al. recently reported:
Our fuzzer tool discovered an uninitialized pointer issue in the
bpf_prog_test_run_xdp() function within the Linux kernel's BPF subsystem.
This leads to a NULL pointer dereference when a BPF program attempts to
deference the txq member of struct xdp_buff object.
The test initializes two programs of BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP: progA acts as the
entry point for bpf_prog_test_run_xdp() and its expected_attach_type can
neither be of be BPF_XDP_DEVMAP nor BPF_XDP_CPUMAP. progA calls into a slot
of a tailcall map it owns. progB's expected_attach_type must be BPF_XDP_DEVMAP
to pass xdp_is_valid_access() validation. The program returns struct xdp_md's
egress_ifindex, and the latter is only allowed to be accessed under mentioned
expected_attach_type. progB is then inserted into the tailcall which progA
calls.
The underlying issue goes beyond XDP though. Another example are programs
of type BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SOCK_ADDR. sock_addr_is_valid_access() as well
as sock_addr_func_proto() have different logic depending on the programs'
expected_attach_type. Similarly, a program attached to BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETPEERNAME
should not be allowed doing a tailcall into a program which calls bpf_bind()
out of BPF which is only enabled for BPF_CGROUP_INET4_CONNECT.
In short, specifying expected_attach_type allows to open up additional
functionality or restrictions beyond what the basic bpf_prog_type enables.
The use of tailcalls must not violate these constraints. Fix it by enforcing
expected_attach_type in __bpf_prog_map_compatible().
Note that we only enforce this for tailcall maps, but not for BPF devmaps or
cpumaps: There, the programs are invoked through dev_map_bpf_prog_run*() and
cpu_map_bpf_prog_run*() which set up a new environment / context and therefore
these situations are not prone to this issue.
References
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Version |
|---|
{
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nbpf: Enforce expected_attach_type for tailcall compatibility\n\nYinhao et al. recently reported:\n\n Our fuzzer tool discovered an uninitialized pointer issue in the\n bpf_prog_test_run_xdp() function within the Linux kernel\u0027s BPF subsystem.\n This leads to a NULL pointer dereference when a BPF program attempts to\n deference the txq member of struct xdp_buff object.\n\nThe test initializes two programs of BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP: progA acts as the\nentry point for bpf_prog_test_run_xdp() and its expected_attach_type can\nneither be of be BPF_XDP_DEVMAP nor BPF_XDP_CPUMAP. progA calls into a slot\nof a tailcall map it owns. progB\u0027s expected_attach_type must be BPF_XDP_DEVMAP\nto pass xdp_is_valid_access() validation. The program returns struct xdp_md\u0027s\negress_ifindex, and the latter is only allowed to be accessed under mentioned\nexpected_attach_type. progB is then inserted into the tailcall which progA\ncalls.\n\nThe underlying issue goes beyond XDP though. Another example are programs\nof type BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SOCK_ADDR. sock_addr_is_valid_access() as well\nas sock_addr_func_proto() have different logic depending on the programs\u0027\nexpected_attach_type. Similarly, a program attached to BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETPEERNAME\nshould not be allowed doing a tailcall into a program which calls bpf_bind()\nout of BPF which is only enabled for BPF_CGROUP_INET4_CONNECT.\n\nIn short, specifying expected_attach_type allows to open up additional\nfunctionality or restrictions beyond what the basic bpf_prog_type enables.\nThe use of tailcalls must not violate these constraints. Fix it by enforcing\nexpected_attach_type in __bpf_prog_map_compatible().\n\nNote that we only enforce this for tailcall maps, but not for BPF devmaps or\ncpumaps: There, the programs are invoked through dev_map_bpf_prog_run*() and\ncpu_map_bpf_prog_run*() which set up a new environment / context and therefore\nthese situations are not prone to this issue."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2025-40123",
"lastModified": "2025-11-12T16:19:12.850",
"metrics": {},
"published": "2025-11-12T11:15:41.807",
"references": [
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/08cb3dc9d2b44f153d0bcf2cb966e4a94b5d0f32"
},
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4540aed51b12bc13364149bf95f6ecef013197c0"
},
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a99de19128aec0913f3d529f529fbbff5edfaff8"
},
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c1ad19b5d8e23123503dcaf2d4342e1b90b923ad"
},
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f856c598080ba7ce1252867b8ecd6ad5bdaf9a6a"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"vulnStatus": "Awaiting Analysis"
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…