ghsa-84rw-8fgg-vwpf
Vulnerability from github
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf: copy_verifier_state() should copy 'loop_entry' field
The bpf_verifier_state.loop_entry state should be copied by copy_verifier_state(). Otherwise, .loop_entry values from unrelated states would poison env->cur_state.
Additionally, env->stack should not contain any states with .loop_entry != NULL. The states in env->stack are yet to be verified, while .loop_entry is set for states that reached an equivalent state. This means that env->cur_state->loop_entry should always be NULL after pop_stack().
See the selftest in the next commit for an example of the program that is not safe yet is accepted by verifier w/o this fix.
This change has some verification performance impact for selftests:
File Program Insns (A) Insns (B) Insns (DIFF) States (A) States (B) States (DIFF)
arena_htab.bpf.o arena_htab_llvm 717 426 -291 (-40.59%) 57 37 -20 (-35.09%) arena_htab_asm.bpf.o arena_htab_asm 597 445 -152 (-25.46%) 47 37 -10 (-21.28%) arena_list.bpf.o arena_list_del 309 279 -30 (-9.71%) 23 14 -9 (-39.13%) iters.bpf.o iter_subprog_check_stacksafe 155 141 -14 (-9.03%) 15 14 -1 (-6.67%) iters.bpf.o iter_subprog_iters 1094 1003 -91 (-8.32%) 88 83 -5 (-5.68%) iters.bpf.o loop_state_deps2 479 725 +246 (+51.36%) 46 63 +17 (+36.96%) kmem_cache_iter.bpf.o open_coded_iter 63 59 -4 (-6.35%) 7 6 -1 (-14.29%) verifier_bits_iter.bpf.o max_words 92 84 -8 (-8.70%) 8 7 -1 (-12.50%) verifier_iterating_callbacks.bpf.o cond_break2 113 107 -6 (-5.31%) 12 12 +0 (+0.00%)
And significant negative impact for sched_ext:
File Program Insns (A) Insns (B) Insns (DIFF) States (A) States (B) States (DIFF)
bpf.bpf.o lavd_init 7039 14723 +7684 (+109.16%) 490 1139 +649 (+132.45%)
bpf.bpf.o layered_dispatch 11485 10548 -937 (-8.16%) 848 762 -86 (-10.14%)
bpf.bpf.o layered_dump 7422 1000001 +992579 (+13373.47%) 681 31178 +30497 (+4478.27%)
bpf.bpf.o layered_enqueue 16854 71127 +54273 (+322.02%) 1611 6450 +4839 (+300.37%)
bpf.bpf.o p2dq_dispatch 665 791 +126 (+18.95%) 68 78 +10 (+14.71%)
bpf.bpf.o p2dq_init 2343 2980 +637 (+27.19%) 201 237 +36 (+17.91%)
bpf.bpf.o refresh_layer_cpumasks 16487 674760 +658273 (+3992.68%) 1770 65370 +63600 (+3593.22%)
bpf.bpf.o rusty_select_cpu 1937 40872 +38935 (+2010.07%) 177 3210 +3033 (+1713.56%)
scx_central.bpf.o central_dispatch 636 2687 +2051 (+322.48%) 63 227 +164 (+260.32%)
scx_nest.bpf.o nest_init 636 815 +179 (+28.14%) 60 73 +13 (+21.67%)
scx_qmap.bpf.o qmap_dispatch
---truncated---
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-38060"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-06-18T10:15:38Z",
"severity": null
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nbpf: copy_verifier_state() should copy \u0027loop_entry\u0027 field\n\nThe bpf_verifier_state.loop_entry state should be copied by\ncopy_verifier_state(). Otherwise, .loop_entry values from unrelated\nstates would poison env-\u003ecur_state.\n\nAdditionally, env-\u003estack should not contain any states with\n.loop_entry != NULL. The states in env-\u003estack are yet to be verified,\nwhile .loop_entry is set for states that reached an equivalent state.\nThis means that env-\u003ecur_state-\u003eloop_entry should always be NULL after\npop_stack().\n\nSee the selftest in the next commit for an example of the program that\nis not safe yet is accepted by verifier w/o this fix.\n\nThis change has some verification performance impact for selftests:\n\nFile Program Insns (A) Insns (B) Insns (DIFF) States (A) States (B) States (DIFF)\n---------------------------------- ---------------------------- --------- --------- -------------- ---------- ---------- -------------\narena_htab.bpf.o arena_htab_llvm 717 426 -291 (-40.59%) 57 37 -20 (-35.09%)\narena_htab_asm.bpf.o arena_htab_asm 597 445 -152 (-25.46%) 47 37 -10 (-21.28%)\narena_list.bpf.o arena_list_del 309 279 -30 (-9.71%) 23 14 -9 (-39.13%)\niters.bpf.o iter_subprog_check_stacksafe 155 141 -14 (-9.03%) 15 14 -1 (-6.67%)\niters.bpf.o iter_subprog_iters 1094 1003 -91 (-8.32%) 88 83 -5 (-5.68%)\niters.bpf.o loop_state_deps2 479 725 +246 (+51.36%) 46 63 +17 (+36.96%)\nkmem_cache_iter.bpf.o open_coded_iter 63 59 -4 (-6.35%) 7 6 -1 (-14.29%)\nverifier_bits_iter.bpf.o max_words 92 84 -8 (-8.70%) 8 7 -1 (-12.50%)\nverifier_iterating_callbacks.bpf.o cond_break2 113 107 -6 (-5.31%) 12 12 +0 (+0.00%)\n\nAnd significant negative impact for sched_ext:\n\nFile Program Insns (A) Insns (B) Insns (DIFF) States (A) States (B) States (DIFF)\n----------------- ---------------------- --------- --------- -------------------- ---------- ---------- ------------------\nbpf.bpf.o lavd_init 7039 14723 +7684 (+109.16%) 490 1139 +649 (+132.45%)\nbpf.bpf.o layered_dispatch 11485 10548 -937 (-8.16%) 848 762 -86 (-10.14%)\nbpf.bpf.o layered_dump 7422 1000001 +992579 (+13373.47%) 681 31178 +30497 (+4478.27%)\nbpf.bpf.o layered_enqueue 16854 71127 +54273 (+322.02%) 1611 6450 +4839 (+300.37%)\nbpf.bpf.o p2dq_dispatch 665 791 +126 (+18.95%) 68 78 +10 (+14.71%)\nbpf.bpf.o p2dq_init 2343 2980 +637 (+27.19%) 201 237 +36 (+17.91%)\nbpf.bpf.o refresh_layer_cpumasks 16487 674760 +658273 (+3992.68%) 1770 65370 +63600 (+3593.22%)\nbpf.bpf.o rusty_select_cpu 1937 40872 +38935 (+2010.07%) 177 3210 +3033 (+1713.56%)\nscx_central.bpf.o central_dispatch 636 2687 +2051 (+322.48%) 63 227 +164 (+260.32%)\nscx_nest.bpf.o nest_init 636 815 +179 (+28.14%) 60 73 +13 (+21.67%)\nscx_qmap.bpf.o qmap_dispatch \n---truncated---",
"id": "GHSA-84rw-8fgg-vwpf",
"modified": "2025-06-18T12:30:33Z",
"published": "2025-06-18T12:30:33Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-38060"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/46ba5757a7a4714e7d3f68cfe118208822cb3d78"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/8b4afd89fa75f738a80ca849126fd3cad77bcbf1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/bbbc02b7445ebfda13e4847f4f1413c6480a85a9"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
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.
- 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.