CVE-2023-53809

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: l2tp: Avoid possible recursive deadlock in l2tp_tunnel_register() When a file descriptor of pppol2tp socket is passed as file descriptor of UDP socket, a recursive deadlock occurs in l2tp_tunnel_register(). This situation is reproduced by the following program: int main(void) { int sock; struct sockaddr_pppol2tp addr; sock = socket(AF_PPPOX, SOCK_DGRAM, PX_PROTO_OL2TP); if (sock < 0) { perror("socket"); return 1; } addr.sa_family = AF_PPPOX; addr.sa_protocol = PX_PROTO_OL2TP; addr.pppol2tp.pid = 0; addr.pppol2tp.fd = sock; addr.pppol2tp.addr.sin_family = PF_INET; addr.pppol2tp.addr.sin_port = htons(0); addr.pppol2tp.addr.sin_addr.s_addr = inet_addr("192.168.0.1"); addr.pppol2tp.s_tunnel = 1; addr.pppol2tp.s_session = 0; addr.pppol2tp.d_tunnel = 0; addr.pppol2tp.d_session = 0; if (connect(sock, (const struct sockaddr *)&addr, sizeof(addr)) < 0) { perror("connect"); return 1; } return 0; } This program causes the following lockdep warning: ============================================ WARNING: possible recursive locking detected 6.2.0-rc5-00205-gc96618275234 #56 Not tainted -------------------------------------------- repro/8607 is trying to acquire lock: ffff8880213c8130 (sk_lock-AF_PPPOX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: l2tp_tunnel_register+0x2b7/0x11c0 but task is already holding lock: ffff8880213c8130 (sk_lock-AF_PPPOX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: pppol2tp_connect+0xa82/0x1a30 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 ---- lock(sk_lock-AF_PPPOX); lock(sk_lock-AF_PPPOX); *** DEADLOCK *** May be due to missing lock nesting notation 1 lock held by repro/8607: #0: ffff8880213c8130 (sk_lock-AF_PPPOX){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: pppol2tp_connect+0xa82/0x1a30 stack backtrace: CPU: 0 PID: 8607 Comm: repro Not tainted 6.2.0-rc5-00205-gc96618275234 #56 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.1-2.fc37 04/01/2014 Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x100/0x178 __lock_acquire.cold+0x119/0x3b9 ? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x410/0x410 lock_acquire+0x1e0/0x610 ? l2tp_tunnel_register+0x2b7/0x11c0 ? lock_downgrade+0x710/0x710 ? __fget_files+0x283/0x3e0 lock_sock_nested+0x3a/0xf0 ? l2tp_tunnel_register+0x2b7/0x11c0 l2tp_tunnel_register+0x2b7/0x11c0 ? sprintf+0xc4/0x100 ? l2tp_tunnel_del_work+0x6b0/0x6b0 ? debug_object_deactivate+0x320/0x320 ? lockdep_init_map_type+0x16d/0x7a0 ? lockdep_init_map_type+0x16d/0x7a0 ? l2tp_tunnel_create+0x2bf/0x4b0 ? l2tp_tunnel_create+0x3c6/0x4b0 pppol2tp_connect+0x14e1/0x1a30 ? pppol2tp_put_sk+0xd0/0xd0 ? aa_sk_perm+0x2b7/0xa80 ? aa_af_perm+0x260/0x260 ? bpf_lsm_socket_connect+0x9/0x10 ? pppol2tp_put_sk+0xd0/0xd0 __sys_connect_file+0x14f/0x190 __sys_connect+0x133/0x160 ? __sys_connect_file+0x190/0x190 ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x7d/0x100 ? ktime_get_coarse_real_ts64+0x1b7/0x200 ? ktime_get_coarse_real_ts64+0x147/0x200 ? __audit_syscall_entry+0x396/0x500 __x64_sys_connect+0x72/0xb0 do_syscall_64+0x38/0xb0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd This patch fixes the issue by getting/creating the tunnel before locking the pppol2tp socket.

At a glance

Exploit odds

0.2% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).

Fix

No patch or advisory is linked yet. Look at mitigations or restrict exposure.

Timeline

1. 2025-12-09 01:16 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
2. 2026-06-17 06:46 UTC Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

• Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
• Exploit odds: 0.2% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
• Severity: not scored yet.
• Fix: none linked yet, which raises it.

Details

Published

2025-12-09 01:16 UTC

Last modified

2026-06-17 06:46 UTC

Exploit probability

0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days

Record status

Deferred

Is it in your code?

Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.

Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2023-53809.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2023-53809. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.

Copy as ticket · More options · Status badge