Look up another CVE · open CVE-2026-98061 in the interactive tracker
CVE-2026-98061
bpf: Reject tail calls directly from callback frames
Published 2026-09-25 (24 days ago) by the Linux kernel CNA. Subsystem kernel/bpf. Debian urgency: unimportant.
What to do, per Debian release
Debian's own status for CVE-2026-98061 in every release this site tracks, and what each one means in practice. Every status below is the one the Debian Security Team publishes for this CVE. source
| Release | Status | Version | What this means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian 12bookworm | not affected | 6.1.190-1 | Nothing to do. bookworm never shipped the vulnerable code. |
| Debian 13trixie | not affected | 6.12.113-1 | Nothing to do. trixie never shipped the vulnerable code. |
| Debian 14forky | fixed | 7.2.7-1 | Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 7.2.7-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts. |
| Debian unstablesid | fixed | 7.2.7-1 | Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 7.2.7-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts. |
The vulnerability
What the bug is
A tail call from a non-zero frame is modeled as a return from that frame. The verifier makes R0 unknown and calls prepare_func_exit() for the taken branch. When the current frame is a synchronous callback, prepare_func_exit() enforces the callback return-value contract and marks R0 precise. Since the tail-call path synthesized R0 rather than deriving it from an instruction, precision backtracking reaches the callback-calling instruction with R0 still requested and triggers the "callback unexpected regs" verifier bug. A CAP_BPF task can therefore cause a WARN and an -EFAULT BPF_PROG_LOAD. Tail calls reachable from callbacks are already rejected later by check_max_stack_depth(). Reject a tail call made directly by a callback before constructing the inconsistent return state, using the existing diagnostic. Tail calls from ordinary subprograms keep their current behavior.
Where it lives
The fix touches these files. If the subsystem is one you do not use, the practical exposure is lower, though the package is still the vulnerable one.
kernel/bpf/verifier.c
- What this is
- BPF [CORE]MAINTAINERS section matched on kernel/bpf/verifier.c · bpf@vger.kernel.org · Maintained
Check it on the machine
grep -wE 'CONFIG_BPF|CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL' /boot/config-$(uname -r)Reads the booted kernel's own configuration, on the machine and nowhere else. =y is built in, =m is a module, and an is not set line means the code is not there.
Show whether Debian builds this, per release
Debian builds this code. Every release below compiles the affected file into the kernels it ships.
- bookworm, trixie, forky, sidy
- y
- built into the kernel image on every flavour - only a patch removes it
- Build switches
- CONFIG_BPF, CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL
- Reads as
- all on means the file is compiled; any one off means it is not.
From the configuration Debian publishes for every kernel flavour it builds. It covers only the architectures Debian ships a linux-config package for, and nothing about a kernel you built yourself. Debian's own status above stays authoritative about the source package.MAINTAINERS kbuild Makefiles Debian linux-config packages
Signals
- Published
- 2026-09-25 (24 days ago)source
- CVSS
- no vector published, unrated
- Attack vector
- not published
- EPSS
- 0.17%, higher than 5.4% of all CVEssource
- CISA KEV
- not listedthe KEV catalogue
- Debian urgency
- unimportantsource
- Subsystem
- kernel/bpf
Upstream fixes
The versions the CNA records as introducing and fixing this, and the commit for each. source
| Introduced | Fixed in | Commit |
|---|---|---|
| 6.18.2 | 6.18.53 | 617c8266e49f |
| 6.19 | 7.2.7 | 96d31b28263c |
| 6.19 | 7.3 | 266aa4ad0b2e |
Why the CNA scored it this way
The kernel CNA published no CVSS vector and no reasoning for CVE-2026-98061, which is why it is shown as unrated rather than given an invented score. 6,405 of the 20,413 CVEs here carry reasoning; this is not one of them.