CVE-2026-64025
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, skmsg: fix verdict sk_data_ready racing with ktls rx sk_psock_strp_data_ready() already checks tls_sw_has_ctx_rx() and defers to psock->saved_data_ready when a TLS RX context is present, avoiding a conflict with the TLS strparser's ownership of the receive queue (commit e91de6afa81c, "bpf: Fix running sk_skb program types with ktls"). sk_psock_verdict_data_ready() has no equivalent guard. When a socket is inserted into a sockmap (BPF_SK_SKB_VERDICT) before TLS RX is configured, tls_sw_strparser_arm() saves sk_psock_verdict_data_ready as rx_ctx->saved_data_ready. On data arrival: tls_data_ready -> tls_strp_data_ready -> tls_rx_msg_ready -> saved_data_ready() = sk_psock_verdict_data_ready() -> tcp_read_skb() drains sk_receive_queue via __skb_unlink() without calling tcp_eat_skb(), so copied_seq is not advanced. tls_strp_msg_load() then finds tcp_inq() >= full_len (stale), calls tcp_recv_skb() on the now-empty queue, hits WARN_ON_ONCE(!first), and returns with rx_ctx->strp.anchor.frag_list pointing at a psock-owned (potentially freed) skb. tls_decrypt_sg() subsequently walks that frag_list: use-after-free. Apply the same fix as sk_psock_strp_data_ready(): if a TLS RX context is present, call psock->saved_data_ready (sock_def_readable) to wake recv() waiters and return immediately, leaving the receive queue untouched. TLS retains sole ownership of the queue and decrypts the record normally through tls_sw_recvmsg().
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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/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.
From vendor dataThere 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 $2,300. 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-2026-64025 — 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-2026-64025 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