CVE-2026-98134

bpf: check_cond_jmp_op(): properly infer if register is null

MEDIUM
5.5
CVSS Score
Published: September 25, 2026 at 10:36 AM UTC
Updated: October 21, 2026 at 01:21 PM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorLinux Kernel

Using Linux by Linux?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect Linux - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
MEDIUM5.5
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.2%

Description

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: // `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 dereference 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. 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.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

6.2 ≤ v < 7.2.76.27.37.3 rc1befae75856ab406a3f3fab2aa2118cf3b2dfe3e6
Vendor states this is fixed in b55c9f019e169ed0d01394f96e172286a8b21b99 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in d3ef6c097ba078e1f8c7239d76a0ce8b61e75095 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.12.114 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.18.57 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.2 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.6.160 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7.2.7 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7.3 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7.3-rc2 (unaffected)

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet. What the record does show:

CVSS

Attack Vector
LOCAL
Complexity
LOW
Privileges
LOW
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
NONE
Integrity
NONE
Availability
HIGH
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusMODIFIED
CWE
CWE-476

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card