CVE-2026-23294
Last modified
CVE-2026-23294 is a high-severity vulnerability rated 7/10 on the CVSS scale. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Fix race in devmap on PREEMPT_RT On PREEMPT_RT kernels, the per-CPU xdp_dev_bulk_queue (bq) can be accessed concurrently by multiple preemptible tasks on the same CPU. The original code assumes bq_enqueue() and __dev_flush() run atomically with respect to each other on the same CPU, relying on local_bh_disable() to prevent preemption. However, on PREEMPT_RT, local_bh_disable() only calls migrate_disable() (when PREEMPT_RT_NEEDS_BH_LOCK is not set) and does not disable preemption, which allows CFS scheduling to preempt a task during bq_xmit_all(), enabling another task on the same CPU to enter bq_enqueue() and operate on the same per-CPU bq concurrently. This leads to several races: 1. EPSS estimates a 0.09% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.
Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Fix race in devmap on PREEMPT_RT On PREEMPT_RT kernels, the per-CPU xdp_dev_bulk_queue (bq) can be accessed concurrently by multiple preemptible tasks on the same CPU. The original code assumes bq_enqueue() and __dev_flush() run atomically with respect to each other on the same CPU, relying on local_bh_disable() to prevent preemption. However, on PREEMPT_RT, local_bh_disable() only calls migrate_disable() (when PREEMPT_RT_NEEDS_BH_LOCK is not set) and does not disable preemption, which allows CFS scheduling to preempt a task during bq_xmit_all(), enabling another task on the same CPU to enter bq_enqueue() and operate on the same per-CPU bq concurrently. This leads to several races: 1. Double-free / use-after-free on bq->q[]: bq_xmit_all() snapshots cnt = bq->count, then iterates bq->q[0..cnt-1] to transmit frames. If preempted after the snapshot, a second task can call bq_enqueue() -> bq_xmit_all() on the same bq, transmitting (and freeing) the same frames. When the first task resumes, it operates on stale pointers in bq->q[], causing use-after-free. 2. bq->count and bq->q[] corruption: concurrent bq_enqueue() modifying bq->count and bq->q[] while bq_xmit_all() is reading them. 3. dev_rx/xdp_prog teardown race: __dev_flush() clears bq->dev_rx and bq->xdp_prog after bq_xmit_all(). If preempted between bq_xmit_all() return and bq->dev_rx = NULL, a preempting bq_enqueue() sees dev_rx still set (non-NULL), skips adding bq to the flush_list, and enqueues a frame. When __dev_flush() resumes, it clears dev_rx and removes bq from the flush_list, orphaning the newly enqueued frame. 4. __list_del_clearprev() on flush_node: similar to the cpumap race, both tasks can call __list_del_clearprev() on the same flush_node, the second dereferences the prev pointer already set to NULL. The race between task A (__dev_flush -> bq_xmit_all) and task B (bq_enqueue -> bq_xmit_all) on the same CPU: Task A (xdp_do_flush) Task B (ndo_xdp_xmit redirect) ---------------------- -------------------------------- __dev_flush(flush_list) bq_xmit_all(bq) cnt = bq->count /* e.g. 16 */ /* start iterating bq->q[] */ <-- CFS preempts Task A --> bq_enqueue(dev, xdpf) bq->count == DEV_MAP_BULK_SIZE bq_xmit_all(bq, 0) cnt = bq->count /* same 16! */ ndo_xdp_xmit(bq->q[]) /* frames freed by driver */ bq->count = 0 <-- Task A resumes --> ndo_xdp_xmit(bq->q[]) /* use-after-free: frames already freed! */ Fix this by adding a local_lock_t to xdp_dev_bulk_queue and acquiring it in bq_enqueue() and __dev_flush(). These paths already run under local_bh_disable(), so use local_lock_nested_bh() which on non-RT is a pure annotation with no overhead, and on PREEMPT_RT provides a per-CPU sleeping lock that serializes access to the bq.
Metrics
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Weakness Enumeration
Affected Software
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Update |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.18, < 6.18.17 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.19, < 6.19.7 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | 7.0 | Rc1 |
References
Timeline
- Published
- Last Modified
- Status
- Analyzed
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2026-23294?
How severe is CVE-2026-23294?
How do I fix CVE-2026-23294?
Are you affected by CVE-2026-23294?
Run a free Strix scan to check your systems for this vulnerability.
Scan your code nowSource: NVD / NIST
