Full List

Search

Recent Vulnerabilities

• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23200 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling-fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
• CVE-2026-23199 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: procfs: avoid fetching build ID while holding VMA lock Fix PROCMAP_QUERY to fetch optional build ID only after dropping mmap_lock or per-VMA lock, whichever was used to lock VMA under question, to avoid deadlock reported by syzbot: - #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}: __might_fault+0xed/0x170 _copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720 copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0 filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0 blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0 vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0 ksys_read+0x12a/0x250 do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}: __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0 lock_acquire+0x185/0x340 down_read+0x98/0x490 blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0 __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90 freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80 __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0 do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050 procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- rlock(&mm->mmap_lock); lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8); lock(&mm->mmap_lock); rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8); *** DEADLOCK *** This seems to be exacerbated (as we haven't seen these syzbot reports before that) by the recent: 777a8560fd29 ("lib/buildid: use __kernel_read() for sleepable context") To make this safe, we need to grab file refcount while VMA is still locked, but other than that everything is pretty straightforward. Internal build_id_parse() API assumes VMA is passed, but it only needs the underlying file reference, so just add another variant build_id_parse_file() that expects file passed directly. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix up kerneldoc]
• CVE-2026-23199 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: procfs: avoid fetching build ID while holding VMA lock Fix PROCMAP_QUERY to fetch optional build ID only after dropping mmap_lock or per-VMA lock, whichever was used to lock VMA under question, to avoid deadlock reported by syzbot: - #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}: __might_fault+0xed/0x170 _copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720 copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0 filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0 blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0 vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0 ksys_read+0x12a/0x250 do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}: __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0 lock_acquire+0x185/0x340 down_read+0x98/0x490 blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0 __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90 freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80 __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0 do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050 procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- rlock(&mm->mmap_lock); lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8); lock(&mm->mmap_lock); rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8); *** DEADLOCK *** This seems to be exacerbated (as we haven't seen these syzbot reports before that) by the recent: 777a8560fd29 ("lib/buildid: use __kernel_read() for sleepable context") To make this safe, we need to grab file refcount while VMA is still locked, but other than that everything is pretty straightforward. Internal build_id_parse() API assumes VMA is passed, but it only needs the underlying file reference, so just add another variant build_id_parse_file() that expects file passed directly. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix up kerneldoc]
• CVE-2026-23199 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: procfs: avoid fetching build ID while holding VMA lock Fix PROCMAP_QUERY to fetch optional build ID only after dropping mmap_lock or per-VMA lock, whichever was used to lock VMA under question, to avoid deadlock reported by syzbot: - #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}: __might_fault+0xed/0x170 _copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720 copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0 filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0 blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0 vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0 ksys_read+0x12a/0x250 do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}: __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0 lock_acquire+0x185/0x340 down_read+0x98/0x490 blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0 __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90 freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80 __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0 do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050 procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- rlock(&mm->mmap_lock); lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8); lock(&mm->mmap_lock); rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8); *** DEADLOCK *** This seems to be exacerbated (as we haven't seen these syzbot reports before that) by the recent: 777a8560fd29 ("lib/buildid: use __kernel_read() for sleepable context") To make this safe, we need to grab file refcount while VMA is still locked, but other than that everything is pretty straightforward. Internal build_id_parse() API assumes VMA is passed, but it only needs the underlying file reference, so just add another variant build_id_parse_file() that expects file passed directly. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix up kerneldoc]
• CVE-2026-23199 • published on February 14, 2026 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: procfs: avoid fetching build ID while holding VMA lock Fix PROCMAP_QUERY to fetch optional build ID only after dropping mmap_lock or per-VMA lock, whichever was used to lock VMA under question, to avoid deadlock reported by syzbot: - #1 (&mm->mmap_lock){++++}-{4:4}: __might_fault+0xed/0x170 _copy_to_iter+0x118/0x1720 copy_page_to_iter+0x12d/0x1e0 filemap_read+0x720/0x10a0 blkdev_read_iter+0x2b5/0x4e0 vfs_read+0x7f4/0xae0 ksys_read+0x12a/0x250 do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f -> #0 (&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8){++++}-{4:4}: __lock_acquire+0x1509/0x26d0 lock_acquire+0x185/0x340 down_read+0x98/0x490 blkdev_read_iter+0x2a7/0x4e0 __kernel_read+0x39a/0xa90 freader_fetch+0x1d5/0xa80 __build_id_parse.isra.0+0xea/0x6a0 do_procmap_query+0xd75/0x1050 procfs_procmap_ioctl+0x7a/0xb0 __x64_sys_ioctl+0x18e/0x210 do_syscall_64+0xcb/0xf80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- rlock(&mm->mmap_lock); lock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8); lock(&mm->mmap_lock); rlock(&sb->s_type->i_mutex_key#8); *** DEADLOCK *** This seems to be exacerbated (as we haven't seen these syzbot reports before that) by the recent: 777a8560fd29 ("lib/buildid: use __kernel_read() for sleepable context") To make this safe, we need to grab file refcount while VMA is still locked, but other than that everything is pretty straightforward. Internal build_id_parse() API assumes VMA is passed, but it only needs the underlying file reference, so just add another variant build_id_parse_file() that expects file passed directly. [akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix up kerneldoc]