In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf: Explicitly check accesses to bpf_sock_addr
Syzkaller found a kernel warning on the following sock_addr program:
0: r0 = 0
1: r2 = *(u32 *)(r1 +60)
2: exit
which triggers:
verifier bug: error during ctx access conversion (0)
This is happening because offset 60 in bpf_sock_addr corresponds to an
implicit padding of 4 bytes, right after msg_src_ip4. Access to this
padding isn't rejected in sock_addr_is_valid_access and it thus later
fails to convert the access.
This patch fixes it by explicitly checking the various fields of
bpf_sock_addr in sock_addr_is_valid_access.
I checked the other ctx structures and is_valid_access functions and
didn't find any other similar cases. Other cases of (properly handled)
padding are covered in new tests in a subsequent patch.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
- EG Severity
- Not assessed: no CVSS publishedA missing CVSS is not a severity of zero.
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- No SSVC decision: EchelonGraph has not assessed this CVECISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the BOD 26-04 block below.
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it