<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2026 03:51:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2025-21632 — x86/fpu: Ensure shadow stack is active before "getting" registers</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-21632</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;x86/fpu: Ensure shadow stack is active before &amp;#34;getting&amp;#34; registers&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The x86 shadow stack support has its own set of registers. Those registers
are XSAVE-managed, but they are &amp;#34;supervisor state components&amp;#34; which means
that userspace can not touch them with XSAVE/XRSTOR.  It also means that
they are not accessible from the existing ptrace ABI for XSAVE state.
Thus, there is a new ptrace get/set interface for it.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The regset code that ptrace uses provides an -&amp;gt;active() handler in
addition to the get/set ones. For shadow stack this -&amp;gt;active() handler
verifies that shadow stack is enabled via the ARCH_SHSTK_SHSTK bit in the
thread struct. The -&amp;gt;active() handler is checked from some call sites of
the regset get/set handlers, but not the ptrace ones. This was not
understood when shadow stack support was put in place.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As a result, both the set/get handlers can be called with
XFEATURE_CET_USER in its init state, which would cause get_xsave_addr() to
return NULL and trigger a WARN_ON(). The ssp_set() handler luckily has an
ssp_active() check to avoid surprising the kernel with shadow stack
behavior when the kernel is not ready for it (ARCH_SHSTK_SHSTK==0). That
check just happened to avoid the warning.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But the -&amp;gt;get() side wasn&amp;#39;t so lucky. It can be called with shadow stacks
disabled, triggering the warning in practice, as reported by Christina
Schimpe:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WARNING: CPU: 5 PID: 1773 at arch/x86/kernel/fpu/regset.c:198…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;x86/fpu: Ensure shadow stack is active before &amp;#34;getting&amp;#34; registers&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The x86 shadow stack support has its own set of registers. Those registers
are XSAVE-managed, but they are &amp;#34;supervisor state components&amp;#34; which means
that userspace can not touch them with XSAVE/XRSTOR.  It also means that
they are not accessible from the existing ptrace ABI for XSAVE state.
Thus, there is a new ptrace get/set interface for it.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The regset code that ptrace uses provides an -&amp;gt;active() handler in
addition to the get/set ones. For shadow stack this -&amp;gt;active() handler
verifies that shadow stack is enabled via the ARCH_SHSTK_SHSTK bit in the
thread struct. The -&amp;gt;active() handler is checked from some call sites of
the regset get/set handlers, but not the ptrace ones. This was not
understood when shadow stack support was put in place.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;As a result, both the set/get handlers can be called with
XFEATURE_CET_USER in its init state, which would cause get_xsave_addr() to
return NULL and trigger a WARN_ON(). The ssp_set() handler luckily has an
ssp_active() check to avoid surprising the kernel with shadow stack
behavior when the kernel is not ready for it (ARCH_SHSTK_SHSTK==0). That
check just happened to avoid the warning.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But the -&amp;gt;get() side wasn&amp;#39;t so lucky. It can be called with shadow stacks
disabled, triggering the warning in practice, as reported by Christina
Schimpe:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WARNING: CPU: 5 PID: 1773 at arch/x86/kernel/fpu/regset.c:198…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-21632</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
