<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-09-29T15:17:10.277831+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@circl.lu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-31525</id>
    <title>CVE-2026-31525 — bpf: Fix undefined behavior in interpreter sdiv/smod for INT_MIN</title>
    <updated>2026-09-29T15:17:11.360802+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> Linux</p>
<p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p>
<p>bpf: Fix undefined behavior in interpreter sdiv/smod for INT_MIN</p>
<p>The BPF interpreter's signed 32-bit division and modulo handlers use
the kernel abs() macro on s32 operands. The abs() macro documentation
(include/linux/math.h) explicitly states the result is undefined when
the input is the type minimum. When DST contains S32_MIN (0x80000000),
abs((s32)DST) triggers undefined behavior and returns S32_MIN unchanged
on arm64/x86. This value is then sign-extended to u64 as
0xFFFFFFFF80000000, causing do_div() to compute the wrong result.</p>
<p>The verifier's abstract interpretation (scalar32_min_max_sdiv) computes
the mathematically correct result for range tracking, creating a
verifier/interpreter mismatch that can be exploited for out-of-bounds
map value access.</p>
<p>Introduce abs_s32() which handles S32_MIN correctly by casting to u32
before negating, avoiding signed overflow entirely. Replace all 8
abs((s32)...) call sites in the interpreter's sdiv32/smod32 handlers.</p>
<p>s32 is the only affected case -- the s64 division/modulo handlers do
not use abs().</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-31525"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
