CVE-2026-43080
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: l2tp: Drop large packets with UDP encap syzbot reported a WARN on my patch series [1]. The actual issue is an overflow of 16-bit UDP length field, and it exists in the upstream code. My series added a debug WARN with an overflow check that exposed the issue, that's why syzbot tripped on my patches, rather than on upstream code. syzbot's repro: r0 = socket$pppl2tp(0x18, 0x1, 0x1) r1 = socket$inet6_udp(0xa, 0x2, 0x0) connect$inet6(r1, &(0x7f00000000c0)={0xa, 0x0, 0x0, @loopback, 0xfffffffc}, 0x1c) connect$pppl2tp(r0, &(0x7f0000000240)=@pppol2tpin6={0x18, 0x1, {0x0, r1, 0x4, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0, {0xa, 0x4e22, 0xffff, @ipv4={'\x00', '\xff\xff', @empty}}}}, 0x32) writev(r0, &(0x7f0000000080)=[{&(0x7f0000000000)="ee", 0x34000}], 0x1) It basically sends an oversized (0x34000 bytes) PPPoL2TP packet with UDP encapsulation, and l2tp_xmit_core doesn't check for overflows when it assigns the UDP length field. The value gets trimmed to 16 bites. Add an overflow check that drops oversized packets and avoids sending packets with trimmed UDP length to the wire. syzbot's stack trace (with my patch applied): len >= 65536u WARNING: ./include/linux/udp.h:38 at udp_set_len_short include/linux/udp.h:38 [inline], CPU#1: syz.0.17/5957 WARNING: ./include/linux/udp.h:38 at l2tp_xmit_core net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c:1293 [inline], CPU#1: syz.0.17/5957 WARNING: ./include/linux/udp.h:38 at l2tp_xmit_skb+0x1204/0x18d0 net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c:1327, CPU#1: syz.0.17/5957 Modules linked in: CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 5957 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.2-debian-1.16.2-1 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:udp_set_len_short include/linux/udp.h:38 [inline] RIP: 0010:l2tp_xmit_core net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c:1293 [inline] RIP: 0010:l2tp_xmit_skb+0x1204/0x18d0 net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c:1327 Code: 0f 0b 90 e9 21 f9 ff ff e8 e9 05 ec f6 90 0f 0b 90 e9 8d f9 ff ff e8 db 05 ec f6 90 0f 0b 90 e9 cc f9 ff ff e8 cd 05 ec f6 90 <0f> 0b 90 e9 de fa ff ff 44 89 f1 80 e1 07 80 c1 03 38 c1 0f 8c 4f RSP: 0018:ffffc90003d67878 EFLAGS: 00010293 RAX: ffffffff8ad985e3 RBX: ffff8881a6400090 RCX: ffff8881697f0000 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000034010 RDI: 000000000000ffff RBP: dffffc0000000000 R08: 0000000000000003 R09: 0000000000000004 R10: dffffc0000000000 R11: fffff520007acf00 R12: ffff8881baf20900 R13: 0000000000034010 R14: ffff8881a640008e R15: ffff8881760f7000 FS: 000055557e81f500(0000) GS:ffff8882a9467000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000200000033000 CR3: 00000001612f4000 CR4: 00000000000006f0 Call Trace: <TASK> pppol2tp_sendmsg+0x40a/0x5f0 net/l2tp/l2tp_ppp.c:302 sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:727 [inline] __sock_sendmsg net/socket.c:742 [inline] sock_write_iter+0x503/0x550 net/socket.c:1195 do_iter_readv_writev+0x619/0x8c0 fs/read_write.c:-1 vfs_writev+0x33c/0x990 fs/read_write.c:1059 do_writev+0x154/0x2e0 fs/read_write.c:1105 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x14d/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f RIP: 0033:0x7f636479c629 Code: ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 44 00 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 e8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48 RSP: 002b:00007ffffd4241c8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000014 RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007f6364a15fa0 RCX: 00007f636479c629 RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 0000200000000080 RDI: 0000000000000003 RBP: 00007f6364832b39 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000 R13: 00007f6364a15fac R14: 00007f6364a15fa0 R15: 00007f6364a15fa0 </TASK> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
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>= 2.6.23, < 5.10.258>= 5.11, < 5.15.209>= 5.16, < 6.1.175>= 6.2, < 6.6.136>= 6.7, < 6.12.83>= 6.13, < 6.18.24>= 6.19, < 6.19.14= 7.0CVSS 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 · scoped5.10.2585.15.2096.1.175
Upgrade to kernel >= 5.10.258, >= 5.15.209, >= 6.1.175, or >= 6.6.136 depending on your current branch
- Identify the current running kernel version using `uname -r`
- Determine which version branch your current kernel belongs to (e.g., 5.10.x, 5.15.x, 6.1.x, 6.2.x-6.6.x)
- Upgrade to a kernel version that contains the fix: for 5.10.x branch upgrade to >= 5.10.258, for 5.15.x branch upgrade to >= 5.15.209, for 6.1.x branch upgrade to >= 6.1.175, for 6.2.x-6.6.x branch upgrade to >= 6.6.136
- Use your distribution's standard kernel upgrade procedure (e.g., `apt-get dist-upgrade`, `yum update`, or building from source)
- Reboot the system into the new kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking that the kernel version matches or exceeds the fixed versions listed above
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-2026-43080 — 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-2026-43080 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