bpf: backtracking shouldn't clear outer frame R1-R5 for callbacks
When processing calls to bpf_loop() verifier marks R1 (and R4) as
precise. R1 tracks loop iterations number and because of the
'callback_depth < R1' mechanics in check_helper_call() must be marked
precise. However, precision propagation for R1 was broken,
when bpf_loop() call was verified on a second iteration.
Consider the following verification trace:
- main: bpf_loop(nr_loops, callback ...)
- callback: BPF_EXIT
- main: bpf_loop(nr_loops, callback ...)
- ...
While the first visit of the call to bpf_loop() propagated R1
precision as expected, the second call to mark_chain_precision() in
the check_helper_call() set R1, but it was immediately reset when
backtrack_insn() processed preceding BPF_EXIT in the loop deleted in
this patch.
Because of that, the second visit of the call to bpf_loop() injected
checkpoint with R1 not marked as precise. Which could trick the
verifier into accepting unsafe programs. See the next patch for an
example of such program.
Commit is structured in a way to minimize conflicts when
'bpf' would be eventually merged with 'bpf-next'.
Analysis
Analysis and contextual insights are available on OpenCVE Cloud.
Default status is the baseline for the product, each version can override it (e.g. patched versions marked unaffected).
| Vendor | Product | Default status | Versions | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Linux | Linux | unaffected |
|
|||||||||||||||
| Linux | Linux | affected |
|
No data.
No data.
No data available yet.
No vendor fix or workaround currently provided.
Additional remediation guidance may be available on OpenCVE Cloud.
Tracking
Sign in to view the affected projects.
No advisories yet.
Fri, 25 Sep 2026 10:30:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Description | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: backtracking shouldn't clear outer frame R1-R5 for callbacks When processing calls to bpf_loop() verifier marks R1 (and R4) as precise. R1 tracks loop iterations number and because of the 'callback_depth < R1' mechanics in check_helper_call() must be marked precise. However, precision propagation for R1 was broken, when bpf_loop() call was verified on a second iteration. Consider the following verification trace: - main: bpf_loop(nr_loops, callback ...) - callback: BPF_EXIT - main: bpf_loop(nr_loops, callback ...) - ... While the first visit of the call to bpf_loop() propagated R1 precision as expected, the second call to mark_chain_precision() in the check_helper_call() set R1, but it was immediately reset when backtrack_insn() processed preceding BPF_EXIT in the loop deleted in this patch. Because of that, the second visit of the call to bpf_loop() injected checkpoint with R1 not marked as precise. Which could trick the verifier into accepting unsafe programs. See the next patch for an example of such program. Commit is structured in a way to minimize conflicts when 'bpf' would be eventually merged with 'bpf-next'. | |
| Title | bpf: backtracking shouldn't clear outer frame R1-R5 for callbacks | |
| First Time appeared |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| CPEs | cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* | |
| Vendors & Products |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| References |
|
MITRE
Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published:
Updated: 2026-09-25T10:24:19.881Z
Reserved: 2026-09-25T10:19:56.075Z
Link: CVE-2026-98084
Vulnrichment
No data.
NVD
Status : Received
Published: 2026-09-25T11:17:37.980
Modified: 2026-09-25T11:17:37.980
Link: CVE-2026-98084
Redhat
No data.
OpenCVE Enrichment
No data.
No weakness.