CVE-2026-63923
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: octeontx2-af: validate body pcifunc in rvu_mbox_handler_rep_event_notify rvu_mbox_handler_rep_event_notify() in drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/ octeontx2/af/rvu_rep.c queues a sender-controlled REP_EVENT_NOTIFY request body verbatim, and rvu_rep_up_notify() then forwards event->pcifunc (the nested body field, distinct from the AF-normalised header pcifunc) into rvu_get_pfvf(), rvu_get_pf() and the AF->PF mailbox device index without any bounds check. A VF attached to a PF that has been put into switchdev representor mode reaches this path: the VF mailbox handler otx2_pfvf_mbox_handler() forwards every message id including MBOX_MSG_REP_EVENT_NOTIFY to AF without an allowlist, and the AF dispatcher rewrites only msg->pcifunc, leaving struct rep_event::pcifunc attacker-controlled. The sibling rvu_mbox_handler_esw_cfg() refuses requests whose header pcifunc is not rvu->rep_pcifunc; this handler has no equivalent gate. An out-of-range body pcifunc selects an &rvu->pf[]/&rvu->hwvf[] element past the allocated array and, for RVU_EVENT_MAC_ADDR_CHANGE, turns into a six-byte attacker-chosen OOB ether_addr_copy() target inside the queued worker; KASAN reports a slab-out-of-bounds write in rvu_rep_wq_handler. Reject malformed requests at the handler entry by gating on is_pf_func_valid(), which is already the canonical PF/VF range check in this driver; expose it via rvu.h so callers in rvu_rep.c can use it instead of open-coding the same range arithmetic.
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 · low confidenceCVSS 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
- Changed
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/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 · scopedUpgrade to a Linux kernel version that includes the fix commit for this vulnerability in drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/af/rvu_rep.c - consult kernel.org stable releases for the specific version containing this fix
- Identify the currently running Linux kernel version using `uname -r`
- Check the git.kernel.org references for the specific commit that adds `is_pf_func_valid()` validation in rvu_mbox_handler_rep_event_notify()
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to a version that includes the fix - this is a Linux kernel bugfix that should be available in stable kernel releases after the fix commit
- After kernel upgrade, reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version and confirming the patch is included in `/usr/src/linux` if running a custom kernel
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
There is no version to upgrade to and no patch to apply. Every affected install stays exposed until the vendor ships a fix — or somebody else builds one.
Free. We build fixes in the order the community asks for them — and we’ll tell you the moment this one lands.
We develop and verify an original fix where the vendor hasn’t, from $1,950. Deployed to your staging first — never straight to production.
Scope it with usSee what else the community needs solved on the solutions-needed board.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-63923 — 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-2026-63923 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