Executive Summary
| Informations | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Name | CVE-2022-49985 | First vendor Publication | 2025-06-18 |
| Vendor | Cve | Last vendor Modification | 2025-06-18 |
Security-Database Scoring CVSS v3
| Cvss vector : N/A | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall CVSS Score | NA | ||
| Base Score | NA | Environmental Score | NA |
| impact SubScore | NA | Temporal Score | NA |
| Exploitabality Sub Score | NA | ||
| Calculate full CVSS 3.0 Vectors scores | |||
Security-Database Scoring CVSS v2
| Cvss vector : | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Cvss Base Score | N/A | Attack Range | N/A |
| Cvss Impact Score | N/A | Attack Complexity | N/A |
| Cvss Expoit Score | N/A | Authentication | N/A |
| Calculate full CVSS 2.0 Vectors scores | |||
Detail
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Don't use tnum_range on array range checking for poke descriptors Hsin-Wei reported a KASAN splat triggered by their BPF runtime fuzzer which is based on a customized syzkaller: BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in bpf_int_jit_compile+0x1257/0x13f0 The problem here is that a range of tnum_range(0, map->max_entries - 1) has limited ability to represent the concrete tight range with the tnum as the set of resulting states from value + mask can result in a superset of the actual intended range, and as such a tnum_in(range, reg->var_off) check may yield true when it shouldn't, for example tnum_range(0, 2) would result in 00XX -> v = 0000, m = 0011 such that the intended set of {0, 1, 2} is here represented by a less precise superset of {0, 1, 2, 3}. As the register is known const scalar, really just use the concrete reg->var_off.value for the upper index check. |
Original Source
| Url : http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2022-49985 |
Sources (Detail)
Alert History
| Date | Informations |
|---|---|
| 2025-06-18 17:20:35 |
|
