data built 2026-10-19T13:16:53Z

Look up another CVE · open CVE-2026-98647 in the interactive tracker

CVE-2026-98647

bpf: Fix divide-by-zero in btf_struct_walk()

Published 2026-10-18 (today) by the Linux kernel CNA. Subsystem kernel/bpf. Debian urgency: not yet assigned.

What to do, per Debian release

Debian's own status for CVE-2026-98647 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

ReleaseStatus VersionWhat this means
Debian 12bookwormfixed6.1.190-1Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 6.1.190-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts.
Debian 13trixiefixed6.12.113-1Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 6.12.113-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts.
Debian 14forkyfixed7.2.9-1Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 7.2.9-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts.
Debian unstablesidfixed7.2.9-1Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 7.2.9-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts.

The vulnerability

What the bug is

When an access goes past the struct and the last member is a flexible array, btf_struct_walk() folds the offset back into a single element with (off - moff) % t->size, but never checks that the element type has a size. BTF takes an empty struct, so this in program BTF /* event could be empty */ struct event { #ifdef HAVE_TIMESTAMP __u64 ts; #endif }; struct batch { int nr; struct event events[]; }; divides by zero at prog load time. Getting there needs a PTR_TO_BTF_ID that is not MEM_ALLOC, e.g. a plain read of a local kptr stashed in a map from a sleepable program. Oops: divide error: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI RIP: 0010:btf_struct_walk+0x53f/0x1570 Call Trace: <TASK> btf_struct_access+0x42a/0xcd0 check_ptr_to_btf_access+0x4dc/0x1160 check_mem_access+0x3a45/0x8740 check_load_mem+0x36a/0xd10 do_check_common+0x3ef0/0xb210 bpf_check+0x6d3b/0x8580 bpf_prog_load+0xf7c/0x2720 __sys_bpf+0xa83/0x3690 __x64_sys_bpf+0xc7/0x150 x64_sys_call+0x1f3f/0x27e0 do_syscall_64+0xe5/0x610 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e </TASK> Reject a zero-sized element type. The fixed array path in the same function already bails out on the same thing: btf_struct_walk() ... /* skip empty array */ if (moff == mtrue_end) continue; msize /= total_nelems;

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/btf.c

What this is
BPF [GENERAL] (Safe Dynamic Programs and Tools)MAINTAINERS section matched on kernel/bpf/ · bpf@vger.kernel.org · Supported

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
2026-10-18 (today)source
CVSS
no vector published, unrated
Attack vector
not published
EPSS
not scored
CISA KEV
not listedthe KEV catalogue
Debian urgency
not yet assignedsource
Subsystem
kernel/bpf

Upstream fixes

The versions the CNA records as introducing and fixing this, and the commit for each. source

IntroducedFixed inCommit
5.85.15.2221ea3820937f8
5.86.1.189172756f02663
5.86.6.158934e9ba9f8d0
5.86.12.11263af086cb5fa
5.86.18.558eb4cd72daad
5.87.2.9b8fa56722e9c
5.87.3b0b3dc665296

Why the CNA scored it this way

The kernel CNA published no CVSS vector and no reasoning for CVE-2026-98647, 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.