CVE-2022-50253
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: make sure skb->len != 0 when redirecting to a tunneling device syzkaller managed to trigger another case where skb->len == 0 when we enter __dev_queue_xmit: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 2470 at include/linux/skbuff.h:2576 skb_assert_len include/linux/skbuff.h:2576 [inline] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 2470 at include/linux/skbuff.h:2576 __dev_queue_xmit+0x2069/0x35e0 net/core/dev.c:4295 Call Trace: dev_queue_xmit+0x17/0x20 net/core/dev.c:4406 __bpf_tx_skb net/core/filter.c:2115 [inline] __bpf_redirect_no_mac net/core/filter.c:2140 [inline] __bpf_redirect+0x5fb/0xda0 net/core/filter.c:2163 ____bpf_clone_redirect net/core/filter.c:2447 [inline] bpf_clone_redirect+0x247/0x390 net/core/filter.c:2419 bpf_prog_48159a89cb4a9a16+0x59/0x5e bpf_dispatcher_nop_func include/linux/bpf.h:897 [inline] __bpf_prog_run include/linux/filter.h:596 [inline] bpf_prog_run include/linux/filter.h:603 [inline] bpf_test_run+0x46c/0x890 net/bpf/test_run.c:402 bpf_prog_test_run_skb+0xbdc/0x14c0 net/bpf/test_run.c:1170 bpf_prog_test_run+0x345/0x3c0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:3648 __sys_bpf+0x43a/0x6c0 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5005 __do_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5091 [inline] __se_sys_bpf kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5089 [inline] __x64_sys_bpf+0x7c/0x90 kernel/bpf/syscall.c:5089 do_syscall_64+0x54/0x70 arch/x86/entry/common.c:48 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x61/0xc6 The reproducer doesn't really reproduce outside of syzkaller environment, so I'm taking a guess here. It looks like we do generate correct ETH_HLEN-sized packet, but we redirect the packet to the tunneling device. Before we do so, we __skb_pull l2 header and arrive again at skb->len == 0. Doesn't seem like we can do anything better than having an explicit check after __skb_pull?
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data< 4.14.303>= 4.15, < 4.19.270>= 4.20, < 5.4.229>= 5.5, < 5.10.163>= 5.11, < 5.15.86>= 5.16, < 6.0.16>= 6.1, < 6.1.2CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped4.14.3034.19.2705.4.229
Upgrade to Linux kernel >= 4.14.303 (for 4.14.x), >= 4.19.270 (for 4.19.x), >= 5.4.229 (for 5.4.x), or >= 5.10.163 (for 5.10.x and later). Recommended: latest stable kernel (6.x series)
- 1. Identify the currently running Linux kernel version using 'uname -r'
- 2. Determine which kernel branch your version belongs to (e.g., 4.14.x, 4.19.x, 5.4.x, 5.10.x)
- 3. For kernels < 4.14.303: upgrade to 4.14.303 or later
- 4. For kernels >= 4.15 and < 4.19.270: upgrade to 4.19.270 or later
- 5. For kernels >= 4.20 and < 5.4.229: upgrade to 5.4.229 or later
- 6. For kernels >= 5.5 and < 5.10.163: upgrade to 5.10.163 or later
- 7. Alternatively, upgrade to any stable kernel release >= 5.10.163 (e.g., 5.15.x, 6.1.x, or later stable branches)
- 8. Reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-50253 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-50253 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data