ZeroDay Findings
Sign inSign up

Findings

CVE-2026-98084

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: backtracking shouldn't clear outer frame R1-R5 for callbacks When processing calls to bpf_loop…

Published Sep 25, 2026 · corrected/updated Oct 15, 2026 · evidence confidence high

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: backtracking shouldn't clear outer frame R1-R5 for callbacks When processing calls to bpf_loop() verifier marks R1 (and R4) as precise. R1 tracks loop iterations number and because of the 'callback_depth < R1' mechanics in check_helper_call() must be marked precise. However, precision propagation for R1 was broken, when bpf_loop() call was verified on a second iteration. Consider the following verification trace: - main: bpf_loop(nr_loops, callback ...) - callback: BPF_EXIT - main: bpf_loop(nr_loops, callback ...) - ... While the first visit of the call to bpf_loop() propagated R1 precision as expected, the second call to mark_chain_precision() in the check_helper_call() set R1, but it was immediately reset when backtrack_insn() processed preceding BPF_EXIT in the loop deleted in this patch. Because of that, the second visit of the call to bpf_loop() injected checkpoint with R1 not marked as precise. Which could trick the verifier into accepting unsafe programs. See the next patch for an example of such program. Commit is structured in a way to minimize conflicts when 'bpf' would be eventually merged with 'bpf-next'.

Grounded briefings

Catalog interpretations for three audiences. Each brief cites ingested metadata and the original advisories below. They are not independent research and they do not invent exploit steps.

Executive

CVE-2026-98084 is a unknown public vulnerability record for this product. It is not currently listed in the CISA Known Exploited catalog. Check the linked vendor or CERT advisories for patch status. This summary is a catalog interpretation of the ingested metadata and cites the original advisories below.

System administrator

Identify whether this product is in your estate, then compare installed versions with the affected ranges. Affected version ranges have not been ingested yet. Check the linked vendor or CERT advisories for patch status. Prefer the vendor or distribution advisory linked in Sources before changing production systems. This is a catalog interpretation, not a runbook.

Security analyst

Signals on file: EPSS 0.2%. It is not currently listed in the CISA Known Exploited catalog. Sources contributing to this record: cve_org, epss, nvd. Public exploit references, when present, are outbound links only and are not proof of active exploitation. This is a catalog interpretation of stored metadata.

Exploitation and remediation

  • Exploitation evidence

    Not listed as known exploited in CISA KEV. Not in CISA KEV or VulnCheck KEV.

  • Patch and remediation

    No required-action text is stored yet. Use the vendor or CERT links in Sources for patch availability.

  • Safe detection guidance

    Compare installed versions with the affected ranges below and verify the advisory from the original publisher. This site stores metadata and outbound links only; it does not ship exploit code or proof-of-concept payloads.

Code

The project this record applies to. Exploit listings stay in References.

Timeline

Detection, updates, and resolution for this record.

  1. Sep 25, 2026 · NIST NVD

    Detected

    In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: backtracking shouldn't clear outer frame R1-R5 for callbacks When processing calls to bpf_loop() verifier marks R1 (and R4) as precise. R1 tracks loop iterations number and because of the 'callback_depth < R1' mechanics in check_helper_call() must be marked precise. However, precision propagation for R1 was broken, when bpf_l

  2. Oct 15, 2026 · NIST NVD

    Updated

    In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: backtracking shouldn't clear outer frame R1-R5 for callbacks When processing calls to bpf_loop() verifier marks R1 (and R4) as precise. R1 tracks loop iterations number and because of the 'callback_depth < R1' mechanics in check_helper_call() must be marked precise. However, precision propagation for R1 was broken, when bpf_l

Sources

  • CVE.orgVulnerability recordCVE-2026-98084

    Official CVE identifier

    cve.org
  • FIRST EPSSExploitation probabilityCVE-2026-98084

    30-day exploitation probability 0.2%

    first.org
  • NIST NVDVulnerability recordCVE-2026-98084

    In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: backtracking shouldn't clear outer frame R1-R5 for callbacks When processing calls to bpf_loop() verifier marks R1 (and R4) as precise. R1 tracks loop iterations number and because of the 'callback_depth <

    nvd.nist.gov

References