bpf: consider that tail calls invalidate packet pointers
Tail-called programs could execute any of the helpers that invalidate
packet pointers. Hence, conservatively assume that each tail call
invalidates packet pointers.
Making the change in bpf_helper_changes_pkt_data() automatically makes
use of check_cfg() logic that computes 'changes_pkt_data' effect for
global sub-programs, such that the following program could be
rejected:
int tail_call(struct __sk_buff *sk)
{
bpf_tail_call_static(sk, &jmp_table, 0);
return 0;
}
SEC("tc")
int not_safe(struct __sk_buff *sk)
{
int *p = (void *)(long)sk->data;
... make p valid ...
tail_call(sk);
*p = 42; /* this is unsafe */
...
}
The tc_bpf2bpf.c:subprog_tc() needs change: mark it as a function that
can invalidate packet pointers. Otherwise, it can't be freplaced with
tailcall_freplace.c:entry_freplace() that does a tail call.
Analysis and contextual insights are available on OpenCVE Cloud.
No vendor fix or workaround currently provided.
Additional remediation guidance may be available on OpenCVE Cloud.
Tracking
Sign in to view the affected projects.
| Source | ID | Title |
|---|---|---|
EUVD |
EUVD-2025-13373 | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: consider that tail calls invalidate packet pointers Tail-called programs could execute any of the helpers that invalidate packet pointers. Hence, conservatively assume that each tail call invalidates packet pointers. Making the change in bpf_helper_changes_pkt_data() automatically makes use of check_cfg() logic that computes 'changes_pkt_data' effect for global sub-programs, such that the following program could be rejected: int tail_call(struct __sk_buff *sk) { bpf_tail_call_static(sk, &jmp_table, 0); return 0; } SEC("tc") int not_safe(struct __sk_buff *sk) { int *p = (void *)(long)sk->data; ... make p valid ... tail_call(sk); *p = 42; /* this is unsafe */ ... } The tc_bpf2bpf.c:subprog_tc() needs change: mark it as a function that can invalidate packet pointers. Otherwise, it can't be freplaced with tailcall_freplace.c:entry_freplace() that does a tail call. |
Ubuntu USN |
USN-7513-1 | Linux kernel vulnerabilities |
Ubuntu USN |
USN-7513-2 | Linux kernel (Real-time) vulnerabilities |
Ubuntu USN |
USN-7513-3 | Linux kernel vulnerabilities |
Ubuntu USN |
USN-7513-4 | Linux kernel (HWE) vulnerabilities |
Ubuntu USN |
USN-7513-5 | Linux kernel (Oracle) vulnerabilities |
Ubuntu USN |
USN-7514-1 | Linux kernel (NVIDIA) vulnerabilities |
Ubuntu USN |
USN-7515-1 | Linux kernel (GKE) vulnerabilities |
Ubuntu USN |
USN-7515-2 | Linux kernel vulnerabilities |
Ubuntu USN |
USN-7522-1 | Linux kernel (Azure, N-Series) vulnerabilities |
Ubuntu USN |
USN-7523-1 | Linux kernel (Raspberry Pi Real-time) vulnerabilities |
Ubuntu USN |
USN-7524-1 | Linux kernel (Raspberry Pi) vulnerabilities |
Mon, 10 Nov 2025 17:45:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Weaknesses | CWE-476 | |
| CPEs | cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.13:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.13:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:* |
Sat, 12 Jul 2025 13:45:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Metrics |
epss
|
epss
|
Fri, 09 May 2025 08:15:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| References |
|
Tue, 06 May 2025 14:30:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| References |
| |
| Metrics |
threat_severity
|
cvssV3_1
|
Mon, 05 May 2025 15:00:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Description | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: consider that tail calls invalidate packet pointers Tail-called programs could execute any of the helpers that invalidate packet pointers. Hence, conservatively assume that each tail call invalidates packet pointers. Making the change in bpf_helper_changes_pkt_data() automatically makes use of check_cfg() logic that computes 'changes_pkt_data' effect for global sub-programs, such that the following program could be rejected: int tail_call(struct __sk_buff *sk) { bpf_tail_call_static(sk, &jmp_table, 0); return 0; } SEC("tc") int not_safe(struct __sk_buff *sk) { int *p = (void *)(long)sk->data; ... make p valid ... tail_call(sk); *p = 42; /* this is unsafe */ ... } The tc_bpf2bpf.c:subprog_tc() needs change: mark it as a function that can invalidate packet pointers. Otherwise, it can't be freplaced with tailcall_freplace.c:entry_freplace() that does a tail call. | |
| Title | bpf: consider that tail calls invalidate packet pointers | |
| References |
|
Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published:
Updated: 2026-05-11T21:03:19.146Z
Reserved: 2025-04-16T07:19:43.804Z
Link: CVE-2024-58237
No data.
Status : Analyzed
Published: 2025-05-05T15:15:54.010
Modified: 2025-11-10T17:35:27.920
Link: CVE-2024-58237
OpenCVE Enrichment
Updated: 2025-07-13T11:21:49Z
EUVD
Ubuntu USN