CVE-2026-98134
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
bpf: check_cond_jmp_op(): properly infer if register is null
Nicholas Carlini reported a bug when verifier can incorrectly infer that a pointer is non-null. The bug occurs when two pointers are compared and one of them has a type w/o PTR_MAYBE_NULL flag, but which allows a value to be NULL at runtime. Here is an example:
This happens because of a special case in check_cond_jmp_op(), which attempts to strip PTR_MAYBE_NULL flags from pointer types, when processing comparisons like `rA == rB`, if either rA or rB can't be null.
The non-null property is derived based on the absence of PTR_MAYBE_NULL flag on rA's or rB's type. But that is not sufficient for types like PTR_TO_MEM, as in the example.
Leer descripción completaMostrar menos
This patch replaces type_may_be_null() call with reg_not_null(), which contains an allowlist of types for which absence of PTR_MAYBE_NULL actually means that the value can't be NULL at runtime.
At the moment, the list in the reg_not_null() omits two types for which PTR_MAYBE_NULL is applicable: PTR_TO_XDP_SOCK and PTR_TO_BUF. In order to remain backward compatible, and assuming that only comparison between pointers of the same type makes sense, this commit extends reg_not_null(). W/o such an extension e.g. verifier_jeq_infer_not_null/null_ptr_to_map_value fails.
reg_not_null() can be extended further, but I deem that out of scope for the fix at hand. Explicit base_type(...) != PTR_TO_BTF_ID checks in the check_cond_jmp_op() can be removed with migration to reg_not_null(), but that is a behavioural change, as the special case would start matching for PTR_TO_BTF_ID that is also is_trusted_reg(). I omit the behavioural change from this commit.
Detalles técnicos trazas, registros y código del informe original
// `a` is PTR_TO_MEM | MEM_RDONLY | PTR_UNTRUSTED
// `a` is 0 at runtime.
// `b` is PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE | PTR_MAYBE_NULL
void *a = bpf_rdonly_cast(0, 0);
int *b = bpf_map_lookup_elem(...);
if (a == b)
*b = 42; // verifier does not catch null pointer dereferenceCVSS
NVD no ha asignado puntuación CVSS a esta CVE (habitual desde el cambio de política de abril de 2026).
Probabilidad de explotación (EPSS)
- Probabilidad de explotación en los próximos 30 días: 0.16%
- Percentil entre todas las CVEs puntuadas: 4
- Fecha de la puntuación: 5/10/2026
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System, de FIRST) estima la probabilidad de que una vulnerabilidad sea explotada en 30 días. Complementa a CVSS (impacto) y a CISA KEV (explotación confirmada).
Tecnologías afectadas (1)
⚠ Inferidas por IA a partir de la descripción — NVD aún no ha analizado esta CVE; no son CPE verificados.
Referencias
JSON original (NVD)
Mostrar
{
"id": "CVE-2026-98134",
"cveTags": [],
"metrics": {},
"affected": [
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"affectedData": [
{
"repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git",
"vendor": "Linux",
"product": "Linux",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "befae75856ab406a3f3fab2aa2118cf3b2dfe3e6",
"lessThan": "b55c9f019e169ed0d01394f96e172286a8b21b99",
"versionType": "git"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "befae75856ab406a3f3fab2aa2118cf3b2dfe3e6",
"lessThan": "d3ef6c097ba078e1f8c7239d76a0ce8b61e75095",
"versionType": "git"
}
],
"programFiles": [
"kernel/bpf/verifier.c"
],
"defaultStatus": "unaffected"
},
{
"repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git",
"vendor": "Linux",
"product": "Linux",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.2"
},
{
"status": "unaffected",
"version": "0",
"lessThan": "6.2",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"status": "unaffected",
"version": "7.2.7",
"versionType": "semver",
"lessThanOrEqual": "7.2.*"
},
{
"status": "unaffected",
"version": "7.3-rc2",
"versionType": "original_commit_for_fix",
"lessThanOrEqual": "*"
}
],
"programFiles": [
"kernel/bpf/verifier.c"
],
"defaultStatus": "affected"
}
]
}
],
"published": "2026-09-25T11:17:44.820",
"references": [
{
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/b55c9f019e169ed0d01394f96e172286a8b21b99",
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67"
},
{
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d3ef6c097ba078e1f8c7239d76a0ce8b61e75095",
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67"
}
],
"vulnStatus": "Undergoing Analysis",
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nbpf: check_cond_jmp_op(): properly infer if register is null\n\nNicholas Carlini reported a bug when verifier can incorrectly infer\nthat a pointer is non-null. The bug occurs when two pointers are\ncompared and one of them has a type w/o PTR_MAYBE_NULL flag,\nbut which allows a value to be NULL at runtime.\nHere is an example:\n\n // `a` is PTR_TO_MEM | MEM_RDONLY | PTR_UNTRUSTED\n // `a` is 0 at runtime.\n // `b` is PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE | PTR_MAYBE_NULL\n void *a = bpf_rdonly_cast(0, 0);\n int *b = bpf_map_lookup_elem(...);\n\n if (a == b)\n *b = 42; // verifier does not catch null pointer dereference\n\nThis happens because of a special case in check_cond_jmp_op(),\nwhich attempts to strip PTR_MAYBE_NULL flags from pointer types,\nwhen processing comparisons like `rA == rB`, if either rA or rB can't\nbe null.\n\nThe non-null property is derived based on the absence of\nPTR_MAYBE_NULL flag on rA's or rB's type. But that is not sufficient\nfor types like PTR_TO_MEM, as in the example.\n\nThis patch replaces type_may_be_null() call with reg_not_null(),\nwhich contains an allowlist of types for which absence of\nPTR_MAYBE_NULL actually means that the value can't be NULL at runtime.\n\nAt the moment, the list in the reg_not_null() omits two types for\nwhich PTR_MAYBE_NULL is applicable: PTR_TO_XDP_SOCK and PTR_TO_BUF.\nIn order to remain backward compatible, and assuming that only\ncomparison between pointers of the same type makes sense,\nthis commit extends reg_not_null(). W/o such an extension e.g.\nverifier_jeq_infer_not_null/null_ptr_to_map_value fails.\n\nreg_not_null() can be extended further, but I deem that out of scope\nfor the fix at hand. Explicit base_type(...) != PTR_TO_BTF_ID\nchecks in the check_cond_jmp_op() can be removed with migration to\nreg_not_null(), but that is a behavioural change, as the special case\nwould start matching for PTR_TO_BTF_ID that is also is_trusted_reg().\nI omit the behavioural change from this commit."
}
],
"lastModified": "2026-09-30T14:10:59.253",
"sourceIdentifier": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67"
}