7.1

CVE-2023-53024: bpf: Fix pointer-leak due to insufficient speculative store bypass mitigation

Analyzed
AliasesUBUNTU-CVE-2023-53024DEBIAN-CVE-2023-53024
Published 27-03-2025Last modified 23-05-2026

Vulnerability summary

CVE-2023-53024 is a high (CVSS 7.1) vulnerability in linux. EPSS estimates a 0.21% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 10.6% of scored vulnerabilities.

Priority
Routine

Not severe (CVSS 7.1, local access); no exploitation reported by the 5 checked sources

Source freshness unavailable

How is this decided?
CVSS score
7.1/10
010
High · v3.1 (NVD)
EPSS score
0.21%
0%100%
Low · 0.00 pp in 30 days
KEVNot listedNot listed by any tracked catalog.
RansomwareNot flaggedNo ransomware use recorded.
Public exploits0No public exploits recorded

Advisory lineage

Upstream 0 · Downstream 8 · Related 7

Timeline

  1. 27-03-2025
    PublishedVulnerability first disclosed.
  2. 23-05-2026
    Last modifiedVulnerability information updated.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Fix pointer-leak due to insufficient speculative store bypass mitigation To mitigate Spectre v4, 2039f26f3aca ("bpf: Fix leakage due to insufficient speculative store bypass mitigation") inserts lfence instructions after 1) initializing a stack slot and 2) spilling a pointer to the stack. However, this does not cover cases where a stack slot is first initialized with a pointer (subject to sanitization) but then overwritten with a scalar (not subject to sanitization because the slot was already initialized). In this case, the second write may be subject to speculative store bypass (SSB) creating a speculative pointer-as-scalar type confusion. This allows the program to subsequently leak the numerical pointer value using, for example, a branch-based cache side channel. To fix this, also sanitize scalars if they write a stack slot that previously contained a pointer. Assuming that pointer-spills are only generated by LLVM on register-pressure, the performance impact on most real-world BPF programs should be small. The following unprivileged BPF bytecode drafts a minimal exploit and the mitigation: [...] // r6 = 0 or 1 (skalar, unknown user input) // r7 = accessible ptr for side channel // r10 = frame pointer (fp), to be leaked // r9 = r10 # fp alias to encourage ssb *(u64 *)(r9 - 8) = r10 // fp[-8] = ptr, to be leaked // lfence added here because of pointer spill to stack. // // Ommitted: Dummy bpf_ringbuf_output() here to train alias predictor // for no r9-r10 dependency. // *(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r6 // fp[-8] = scalar, overwrites ptr // 2039f26f3aca: no lfence added because stack slot was not STACK_INVALID, // store may be subject to SSB // // fix: also add an lfence when the slot contained a ptr // r8 = *(u64 *)(r9 - 8) // r8 = architecturally a scalar, speculatively a ptr // // leak ptr using branch-based cache side channel: r8 &= 1 // choose bit to leak if r8 == 0 goto SLOW // no mispredict // architecturally dead code if input r6 is 0, // only executes speculatively iff ptr bit is 1 r8 = *(u64 *)(r7 + 0) # encode bit in cache (0: slow, 1: fast) SLOW: [...] After running this, the program can time the access to *(r7 + 0) to determine whether the chosen pointer bit was 0 or 1. Repeat this 64 times to recover the whole address on amd64. In summary, sanitization can only be skipped if one scalar is overwritten with another scalar. Scalar-confusion due to speculative store bypass can not lead to invalid accesses because the pointer bounds deducted during verification are enforced using branchless logic. See 979d63d50c0c ("bpf: prevent out of bounds speculation on pointer arithmetic") for details. Do not make the mitigation depend on !env->allow_{uninit_stack,ptr_leaks} because speculative leaks are likely unexpected if these were enabled. For example, leaking the address to a protected log file may be acceptable while disabling the mitigation might unintentionally leak the address into the cached-state of a map that is accessible to unprivileged processes.

CVSS metrics

4 scores · 3 sources · 2 versions

EPSS trend

Probability

0.21%

Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days

Percentile

11%

Versus all other CVEs

30-day change

No change 0.00 pp

From 0.20% on 04-10-2026

04-10-202603-11-2026

Known exploited

Compare KEV catalogs
CISA KEV

Not in the CISA KEV catalog.

ENISA CNW

Not in the ENISA CNW catalog.

CIRCL

Not in the CIRCL catalog.

Public exploits

0 found

No public exploits indexed.

Weaknesses

CWE · root cause

No weakness data has been published for this record.

Affected systems

Version check

Known conditions: local access, low-privilege account, no user interaction (CVSS vector). Other conditions: not stated in public data.

Ubuntu109 products
  • linux< 5.4.0-147.164 | < 5.15.0-70.77
  • linux-allwinner-5.19All versions (No fix recorded)
  • linux-aws< 5.4.0-1100.108 | < 5.15.0-1034.38
  • linux-aws-5.0All versions (No fix recorded)
  • linux-aws-5.11All versions (No fix recorded)
Linux2 products
  • linux≥ 872968502114d68c21419cf7eb5ab97717e7b803, < aae109414a57ab4164218f36e2e4a17f027fcaaa | ≥ f5893af2704eb763eb982f01d573f5b19f06b623, < 81b3374944d201872cfcf82730a7860f8e7c31dd | ≥ 0e9280654aa482088ee6ef3deadef331f5ac5fb0, < da75dec7c6617bddad418159ffebcb133f008262 | ≥ 2039f26f3aca5b0e419b98f65dd36481337b86ee, < 01bdcc73dbe7be3ad4d4ee9a59b71e42f461a528 | ≥ 2039f26f3aca5b0e419b98f65dd36481337b86ee, < b0c89ef025562161242a7c19b213bd6b272e93df | ≥ 2039f26f3aca5b0e419b98f65dd36481337b86ee, < e4f4db47794c9f474b184ee1418f42e6a07412b6 | 0b27bdf02c400684225ee5ee99970bcbf5082282 | ≥ 4.19.207, < 4.19.272 | ≥ 5.4.146, < 5.4.231 | ≥ 5.10.56, < 5.10.166 | ≥ 5.13.8, < 5.14 | 5.14
  • linux_kernelEOL≥ 4.19.207, < 4.19.272 | ≥ 5.4.146, < 5.4.231 | ≥ 5.10.56, < 5.10.166 | ≥ 5.13.8, < 5.14 | ≥ 5.14.1, < 5.15.91 | ≥ 5.16, < 6.1.9 | 5.14 | 5.14:rc4 | 5.14:rc5 | 5.14:rc6 | 5.14:rc7 | 6.2:rc1 | 6.2:rc2 | 6.2:rc3 | 6.2:rc4
Debian1 product
  • linux< 6.1.11-1

3 vendors · 112 products

References

10 links