Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.22% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceLinux · Linux
No CVSS base score is available from the CNA, CISA ADP or NIST. Absence of a score is not evidence of low risk; review the vendor advisory, affected exposure and exploit evidence. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 10 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 10 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 10 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.
A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debian trixietrixie · source | linux | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 6.5.6-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 7 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | linux | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 7 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | linux | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 6.5.6-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 7 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | linux | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 6.5.6-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 7 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | linux-azure-6.11 | Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | linux-gcp-6.11 | Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | linux-hwe-6.11 | Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | linux-lowlatency-hwe-6.11 | Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | linux-nvidia-6.11 | Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | linux-oem-6.11 | Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | linux-raspi-realtime | Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | linux-realtime | Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | linux-riscv | Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.
The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.
No CVSS base score is available from the CNA, CISA ADP or NIST. Absence of a score is not evidence of low risk; review the vendor advisory, affected exposure and exploit evidence. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 10 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Fix availability varies by productIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: bpf_sk_storage: Fix invalid wait context lockdep report './test_progs -t test_local_storage' reported a splat: [ 27.137569] ============================= [ 27.138122] [ BUG: Invalid wait context ] [ 27.138650] 6.5.0-03980-gd11ae1b16b0a #247 Tainted: G O [ 27.139542] ----------------------------- [ 27.140106] test_progs/1729 is trying to lock: [ 27.140713] ffff8883ef047b88 (stock_lock){-.-.}-{3:3}, at: local_lock_acquire+0x9/0x130 [ 27.141834] other info that might help us debug this: [ 27.142437] context-{5:5} [ 27.142856] 2 locks held by test_progs/1729: [ 27.143352] #0: ffffffff84bcd9c0 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:3}, at: rcu_lock_acquire+0x4/0x40 [ 27.144492] #1: ffff888107deb2c0 (&storage->lock){..-.}-{2:2}, at: bpf_local_storage_update+0x39e/0x8e0 [ 27.145855] stack backtrace: [ 27.146274] CPU: 0 PID: 1729 Comm: test_progs Tainted: G O 6.5.0-03980-gd11ae1b16b0a #247 [ 27.147550] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a1990b-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 [ 27.149127] Call Trace: [ 27.149490] <TASK> [ 27.149867] dump_stack_lvl+0x130/0x1d0 [ 27.152609] dump_stack+0x14/0x20 [ 27.153131] __lock_acquire+0x1657/0x2220 [ 27.153677] lock_acquire+0x1b8/0x510 [ 27.157908] local_lock_acquire+0x29/0x130 [ 27.159048] obj_cgroup_charge+0xf4/0x3c0 [ 27.160794] slab_pre_alloc_hook+0x28e/0x2b0 [ 27.161931] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x51/0x210 [ 27.163557] __kmalloc+0xaa/0x210 [ 27.164593] bpf_map_kzalloc+0xbc/0x170 [ 27.165147] bpf_selem_alloc+0x130/0x510 [ 27.166295] bpf_local_storage_update+0x5aa/0x8e0 [ 27.167042] bpf_fd_sk_storage_update_elem+0xdb/0x1a0 [ 27.169199] bpf_map_update_value+0x415/0x4f0 [ 27.169871] map_update_elem+0x413/0x550 [ 27.170330] __sys_bpf+0x5e9/0x640 [ 27.174065] __x64_sys_bpf+0x80/0x90 [ 27.174568] do_syscall_64+0x48/0xa0 [ 27.175201] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6e/0xd8 [ 27.175932] RIP: 0033:0x7effb40e41ad [ 27.176357] Code: ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 90 f3 0f 1e fa 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d8 [ 27.179028] RSP: 002b:00007ffe64c21fc8 EFLAGS: 00000202 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000141 [ 27.180088] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ffe64c22768 RCX: 00007effb40e41ad [ 27.181082] RDX: 0000000000000020 RSI: 00007ffe64c22008 RDI: 0000000000000002 [ 27.182030] RBP: 00007ffe64c21ff0 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00007ffe64c22788 [ 27.183038] R10: 0000000000000064 R11: 0000000000000202 R12: 0000000000000000 [ 27.184006] R13: 00007ffe64c22788 R14: 00007effb42a1000 R15: 0000000000000000 [ 27.184958] </TASK> It complains about acquiring a local_lock while holding a raw_spin_lock. It means it should not allocate memory while holding a raw_spin_lock since it is not safe for RT. raw_spin_lock is needed because bpf_local_storage supports tracing context. In particular for task local storage, it is easy to get a "current" task PTR_TO_BTF_ID in tracing bpf prog. However, task (and cgroup) local storage has already been moved to bpf mem allocator which can be used after raw_spin_lock. The splat is for the sk storage. For sk (and inode) storage, it has not been moved to bpf mem allocator. Using raw_spin_lock or not, kzalloc(GFP_ATOMIC) could theoretically be unsafe in tracing context. However, the local storage helper requires a verifier accepted sk pointer (PTR_TO_BTF_ID), it is hypothetical if that (mean running a bpf prog in a kzalloc unsafe context and also able to hold a verifier accepted sk pointer) could happen. This patch avoids kzalloc after raw_spin_lock to silent the splat. There is an existing kzalloc before the raw_spin_lock. At that point, a kzalloc is very likely required because a lookup has just been done before. Thus, this patch always does the kzalloc before acq ---truncated---
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: bpf_sk_storage: Fix invalid wait context lockdep report './test_progs -t test_local_storage' reported a splat: [ 27.137569] ============================= [ 27.138122] [ BUG: Invalid wait context ] [ 27.138650] 6.5.0-03980-gd11ae1b16b0a #247 Tainted: G O [ 27.139542] ----------------------------- [ 27.140106] test_progs/1729 is trying to lock: [ 27.140713] ffff8883ef047b88 (stock_lock){-.-.}-{3:3}, at: local_lock_acquire+0x9/0x130 [ 27.141834] other info that might help us debug this: [ 27.142437] context-{5:5} [ 27.142856] 2 locks held by test_progs/1729: [ 27.143352] #0: ffffffff84bcd9c0 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:3}, at: rcu_lock_acquire+0x4/0x40 [ 27.144492] #1: ffff888107deb2c0 (&storage->lock){..-.}-{2:2}, at: bpf_local_storage_update+0x39e/0x8e0 [ 27.145855] stack backtrace: [ 27.146274] CPU: 0 PID: 1729 Comm: test_progs Tainted: G O 6.5.0-03980-gd11ae1b16b0a #247 [ 27.147550] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a1990b-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 [ 27.149127] Call Trace: [ 27.149490] <TASK> [ 27.149867] dump_stack_lvl+0x130/0x1d0 [ 27.152609] dump_stack+0x14/0x20 [ 27.153131] __lock_acquire+0x1657/0x2220 [ 27.153677] lock_acquire+0x1b8/0x510 [ 27.157908] local_lock_acquire+0x29/0x130 [ 27.159048] obj_cgroup_charge+0xf4/0x3c0 [ 27.160794] slab_pre_alloc_hook+0x28e/0x2b0 [ 27.161931] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x51/0x210 [ 27.163557] __kmalloc+0xaa/0x210 [ 27.164593] bpf_map_kzalloc+0xbc/0x170 [ 27.165147] bpf_selem_alloc+0x130/0x510 [ 27.166295] bpf_local_storage_update+0x5aa/0x8e0 [ 27.167042] bpf_fd_sk_storage_update_elem+0xdb/0x1a0 [ 27.169199] bpf_map_update_value+0x415/0x4f0 [ 27.169871] map_update_elem+0x413/0x550 [ 27.170330] __sys_bpf+0x5e9/0x640 [ 27.174065] __x64_sys_bpf+0x80/0x90 [ 27.174568] do_syscall_64+0x48/0xa0 [ 27.175201] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6e/0xd8 [ 27.175932] RIP: 0033:0x7effb40e41ad [ 27.176357] Code: ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 90 f3 0f 1e fa 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d8 [ 27.179028] RSP: 002b:00007ffe64c21fc8 EFLAGS: 00000202 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000141 [ 27.180088] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ffe64c22768 RCX: 00007effb40e41ad [ 27.181082] RDX: 0000000000000020 RSI: 00007ffe64c22008 RDI: 0000000000000002 [ 27.182030] RBP: 00007ffe64c21ff0 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00007ffe64c22788 [ 27.183038] R10: 0000000000000064 R11: 0000000000000202 R12: 0000000000000000 [ 27.184006] R13: 00007ffe64c22788 R14: 00007effb42a1000 R15: 0000000000000000 [ 27.184958] </TASK> It complains about acquiring a local_lock while holding a raw_spin_lock. It means it should not allocate memory while holding a raw_spin_lock since it is not safe for RT. raw_spin_lock is needed because bpf_local_storage supports tracing context. In particular for task local storage, it is easy to get a "current" task PTR_TO_BTF_ID in tracing bpf prog. However, task (and cgroup) local storage has already been moved to bpf mem allocator which can be used after raw_spin_lock. The splat is for the sk storage. For sk (and inode) storage, it has not been moved to bpf mem allocator. Using raw_spin_lock or not, kzalloc(GFP_ATOMIC) could theoretically be unsafe in tracing context. However, the local storage helper requires a verifier accepted sk pointer (PTR_TO_BTF_ID), it is hypothetical if that (mean running a bpf prog in a kzalloc unsafe context and also able to hold a verifier accepted sk pointer) could happen. This patch avoids kzalloc after raw_spin_lock to silent the splat. There is an existing kzalloc before the raw_spin_lock. At that point, a kzalloc is very likely required because a lookup has just been done before. Thus, this patch always does the kzalloc before acq ---truncated---
The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.
An attacker operating through the affected interface may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: bpf_sk_storage: Fix invalid wait context lockdep report './test_progs -t test_local_storage' reported a splat: [ 27.137569] ============================= [ 27.138122] [ BUG: Invalid wait context ] [ 27.138650] 6.5.0-03980-gd11ae1b16b0a #247 Tainted: G O [ 27.139542] ----------------------------- [ 27.140106] test_progs/1729 is trying to lock: [ 27.140713] ffff8883ef047b88 (stock_lock){-.-.}-{3:3}, at: local_lock_acquire+0x9/0x130 [ 27.141834] other info that might help us debug this: [ 27.142437] context-{5:5} [ 27.142856] 2 locks held by test_progs/1729: [ 27.143352] #0: ffffffff84bcd9c0 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:3}, at: rcu_lock_acquire+0x4/0x40 [ 27.144492] #1: ffff888107deb2c0 (&storage->lock){..-.}-{2:2}, at: bpf_local_storage_update+0x39e/0x8e0 [ 27.145855] stack backtrace: [ 27.146274] CPU: 0 PID: 1729 Comm: test_progs Tainted: G O 6.5.0-03980-gd11ae1b16b0a #247 [ 27.147550] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.14.0-0-g155821a1990b-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 [ 27.149127] Call Trace: [ 27.149490] <TASK> [ 27.149867] dump_stack_lvl+0x130/0x1d0 [ 27.152609] dump_stack+0x14/0x20 [ 27.153131] __lock_acquire+0x1657/0x2220 [ 27.153677] lock_acquire+0x1b8/0x510 [ 27.157908] local_lock_acquire+0x29/0x130 [ 27.159048] obj_cgroup_charge+0xf4/0x3c0 [ 27.160794] slab_pre_alloc_hook+0x28e/0x2b0 [ 27.161931] __kmem_cache_alloc_node+0x51/0x210 [ 27.163557] __kmalloc+0xaa/0x210 [ 27.164593] bpf_map_kzalloc+0xbc/0x170 [ 27.165147] bpf_selem_alloc+0x130/0x510 [ 27.166295] bpf_local_storage_update+0x5aa/0x8e0 [ 27.167042] bpf_fd_sk_storage_update_elem+0xdb/0x1a0 [ 27.169199] bpf_map_update_value+0x415/0x4f0 [ 27.169871] map_update_elem+0x413/0x550 [ 27.170330] __sys_bpf+0x5e9/0x640 [ 27.174065] __x64_sys_bpf+0x80/0x90 [ 27.174568] do_syscall_64+0x48/0xa0 [ 27.175201] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6e/0xd8 [ 27.175932] RIP: 0033:0x7effb40e41ad [ 27.176357] Code: ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 90 f3 0f 1e fa 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 8b 0d8 [ 27.179028] RSP: 002b:00007ffe64c21fc8 EFLAGS: 00000202 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000141 [ 27.180088] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ffe64c22768 RCX: 00007effb40e41ad [ 27.181082] RDX: 0000000000000020 RSI: 00007ffe64c22008 RDI: 0000000000000002 [ 27.182030] RBP: 00007ffe64c21ff0 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00007ffe64c22788 [ 27.183038] R10: 0000000000000064 R11: 0000000000000202 R12: 0000000000000000 [ 27.184006] R13: 00007ffe64c22788 R14: 00007effb42a1000 R15: 0000000000000000 [ 27.184958] </TASK> It complains about acquiring a local_lock while holding a raw_spin_lock. It means it should not allocate memory while holding a raw_spin_lock since it is not safe for RT. raw_spin_lock is needed because bpf_local_storage supports tracing context. In particular for task local storage, it is easy to get a "current" task PTR_TO_BTF_ID in tracing bpf prog. However, task (and cgroup) local storage has already been moved to bpf mem allocator which can be used after raw_spin_lock. The splat is for the sk storage. For sk (and inode) storage, it has not been moved to bpf mem allocator. Using raw_spin_lock or not, kzalloc(GFP_ATOMIC) could theoretically be unsafe in tracing context. However, the local storage helper requires a verifier accepted sk pointer (PTR_TO_BTF_ID), it is hypothetical if that (mean running a bpf prog in a kzalloc unsafe context and also able to hold a verifier accepted sk pointer) could happen. This patch avoids kzalloc after raw_spin_lock to silent the splat. There is an existing kzalloc before the raw_spin_lock. At that point, a kzalloc is very likely required because a lookup has just been done before. Thus, this patch always does the kzalloc before acq ---truncated---
The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.
An attacker operating through the affected interface may attempt exploitation when the stated preconditions are met. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
Not available from the selected scoring authority.Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
Published 9 Dec 2025 · Last source change 3 Oct 2026, 10:55 UTC · CWE not yet assigned
Missing structured fields: CVSS base score, CWE classification. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.