dbcve.org
Linux KernelOperating system · Linux

CVE-2023-53642

MEDIUM · 5.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-10-07
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to 6.1.29 / 6.2.16 or later.
See remediation →
57/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Zero-click Patch available

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 · unedited
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: x86: fix clear_user_rep_good() exception handling annotation This code no longer exists in mainline, because it was removed in commit d2c95f9d6802 ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory clearing") upstream. However, rather than backport the full range of x86 memory clearing and copying cleanups, fix the exception table annotation placement for the final 'rep movsb' in clear_user_rep_good(): rather than pointing at the actual instruction that did the user space access, it pointed to the register move just before it. That made sense from a code flow standpoint, but not from an actual usage standpoint: it means that if user access takes an exception, the exception handler won't actually find the instruction in the exception tables. As a result, rather than fixing it up and returning -EFAULT, it would then turn it into a kernel oops report instead, something like: BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: 0000000020081000 #PF: supervisor write access in kernel mode #PF: error_code(0x0002) - not-present page ... RIP: 0010:clear_user_rep_good+0x1c/0x30 arch/x86/lib/clear_page_64.S:147 ... Call Trace: __clear_user arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess_64.h:103 [inline] clear_user arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess_64.h:124 [inline] iov_iter_zero+0x709/0x1290 lib/iov_iter.c:800 iomap_dio_hole_iter fs/iomap/direct-io.c:389 [inline] iomap_dio_iter fs/iomap/direct-io.c:440 [inline] __iomap_dio_rw+0xe3d/0x1cd0 fs/iomap/direct-io.c:601 iomap_dio_rw+0x40/0xa0 fs/iomap/direct-io.c:689 ext4_dio_read_iter fs/ext4/file.c:94 [inline] ext4_file_read_iter+0x4be/0x690 fs/ext4/file.c:145 call_read_iter include/linux/fs.h:2183 [inline] do_iter_readv_writev+0x2e0/0x3b0 fs/read_write.c:733 do_iter_read+0x2f2/0x750 fs/read_write.c:796 vfs_readv+0xe5/0x150 fs/read_write.c:916 do_preadv+0x1b6/0x270 fs/read_write.c:1008 __do_sys_preadv2 fs/read_write.c:1070 [inline] __se_sys_preadv2 fs/read_write.c:1061 [inline] __x64_sys_preadv2+0xef/0x150 fs/read_write.c:1061 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x39/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd which then looks like a filesystem bug rather than the incorrect exception annotation that it is. [ The alternative to this one-liner fix is to take the upstream series that cleans this all up: 68674f94ffc9 ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for small memory copies") 20f3337d350c ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for small memory clearing") adfcf4231b8c ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory copies") * d2c95f9d6802 ("x86: don't use REP_GOOD or ERMS for user memory clearing") 3639a535587d ("x86: move stac/clac from user copy routines into callers") 577e6a7fd50d ("x86: inline the 'rep movs' in user copies for the FSRM case") 8c9b6a88b7e2 ("x86: improve on the non-rep 'clear_user' function") 427fda2c8a49 ("x86: improve on the non-rep 'copy_user' function") * e046fe5a36a9 ("x86: set FSRS automatically on AMD CPUs that have FSRM") e1f2750edc4a ("x86: remove 'zerorest' argument from __copy_user_nocache()") 034ff37d3407 ("x86: rewrite '__copy_user_nocache' function") with either the whole series or at a minimum the two marked commits being needed to fix this issue ]

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 analysis

A 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
Linux KernelOperating system
Affected:>= 6.1, < 6.1.29>= 6.2, < 6.2.16>= 6.3, < 6.3.3

CVSS 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 · scoped
Upgrade available Upgrade to 6.1.29 / 6.2.16 / 6.3.3 or later
Fixed in 6.1.296.2.166.3.3
Vendor patch git.kernel.org →
Recommended fix High confidence

Upgrade to Linux kernel 6.1.29+, 6.2.16+, or 6.3.3+ depending on your current branch

  1. 1. Check current kernel version with `uname -r` or `cat /proc/version`
  2. 2. Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 6.1.29 or later (if running 6.1.x), or 6.2.16 or later (if running 6.2.x), or 6.3.3 or later (if running 6.3.x)
  3. 3. Reboot the system to apply the new kernel
Caveat Kernel upgrades may require rebuilding out-of-tree kernel modules; ensure compatible drivers/modules are available before rebooting

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

We can perform the upgrade in your staging environment and verify nothing breaks — typical engagement from $1,600. Get the upgrade done

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-53642 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2023-53642 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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