CVE-2026-89579

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Harden bloom filter sizing and indexing on 32-bit kernels bloom_map_alloc() has two 32-bit-specific problems when the computed bitmap reaches the U32_MAX fallback case. First, BITS_TO_BYTES(U32_MAX) is evaluated with 32-bit arithmetic. The addition performed by DIV_ROUND_UP wraps, so the map allocates only the fixed-size bloom filter object while keeping bitset_mask == U32_MAX. Subsequent updates can then write past the allocated object. Second, fixing only the allocation size is not sufficient. The bloom hash is a u32, but set_bit() takes a signed long bit number and x86 test_bit() eventually feeds the index to variable_test_bit(long, ...). On 32-bit kernels, hashes in [0x80000000, U32_MAX] therefore become negative bit offsets. x86 bt/bts with a memory operand interpret those offsets relative to the supplied base, so a map with bitset_mask == U32_MAX can read or write before bloom->bitset even after allocating the full 512 MiB bitmap. Keep the U32_MAX fallback, but split each hash into a word pointer and an in-word bit number before calling test_bit() or set_bit(). The bitops argument is then always in [0, BITS_PER_LONG - 1], while BIT_WORD(h) still selects the intended word in the full bitmap. Compute the bitset size from (u64)bitset_mask + 1 before passing the final size to bpf_map_area_alloc(). This fixes the original under-allocation and keeps the allocated storage consistent with the addressable bitset. Exploitation note: local privilege escalation is possible on a 32-bit x86 kernel using the under-allocation bug from a binary with CAP_BPF.

At a glance

Exploitability

Can be exploited locally on the machine with a low-privilege account. High risk of data exposure, data tampering, service disruption.

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. 2026-09-11 19:38 UTC ReservedThe CVE id was reserved by its CNA
2. 2026-09-11 20:19 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
3. 2026-10-19 09:17 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: 7.8 HIGH (CVSS).
• Fix: none linked yet, which raises it.

Details

Published

2026-09-11 20:19 UTC

Last modified

2026-10-19 09:17 UTC

Exploit probability

0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days

Record status

Received

Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 7.8

Attack vector

Local

Complexity

Low

Privileges needed

Low

User interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

Availability

High

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-2026-89579.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2026-89579. 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