CVE-2026-97945

CVE CVE-2026-97945EUVD EUVD-2026-86799Veröffentlicht 2026-09-25T10:22:55.000Z

Was das Advisory beschreibt

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: x86/mm: Fix user-space data loss with MADV_FREE and THP Some of users of Polars (a data analytics library) have lost production data from this bug. They seem to have just the right combination of huge pages, MADV_FREE and heavy reclaim pressure. pmd_modify() masks the old value with (_HPAGE_CHG_MASK & ~_PAGE_DIRTY), silently discarding the hardware dirty bit. The subsequent pmd_mksaveddirty() call is supposed to transfer _PAGE_DIRTY into _PAGE_SAVED_DIRTY when write-protecting, but the dirty bit was already stripped from the value, so there is nothing left to transfer. Contrast with pte_modify(), which keeps _PAGE_DIRTY_BITS in its mask, and pud_modify(), which keeps _HPAGE_CHG_MASK untouched: pmd_modify() is the odd one out. Any pmd_modify() on a writable, dirty PMD loses the dirty state. One visible consequence is data loss with MADV_FREE on PMD-mapped THP: memset(buf, 0x5A, size); // PMD-mapped THP, PMD dirty madvise(buf, size, MADV_FREE); // PMD cleaned but left writable, // folio marked lazyfree memset(buf, 0x5A, size); // hardware sets _PAGE_DIRTY again mprotect(buf, size, PROT_READ); // pmd_modify() drops the dirty bit mprotect(buf, size, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE); // ... memory pressure ... Reclaim (e.g. under memcg pressure) then finds the lazyfree folio with no dirty bit set anywhere and frees it in __discard_anon_folio_pmd_locked(), even though the data was rewritten after MADV_FREE; subsequent reads fault in fresh zero pages. NUMA hinting alone can trigger the same loss, as do_huge_pmd_numa_page() restores the PMD through pmd_modify() as well. PMD-mapped file THPs are affected too: mprotect()/NUMA hinting dropping the dirty bit means rewritten data is never written back. Fix it by keeping _PAGE_DIRTY in the preserved mask, exactly like pte_modify() and pud_modify() do. The existing pmd_mksaveddirty()/pmd_clear_saveddirty() pair then performs the hardware-dirty <-> saved-dirty transition based on the write bit, preserving the shadow-stack encoding rules.

Quelle: EUVD (ENISA), im Wortlaut der Meldung.

Produkte, die das Advisory nennt

Diese Angaben stammen aus der Meldung selbst, nicht aus einer Prüfung durch uns.

• Linux — Linux bb3aadf7d446aaf22c725b274e2c194ac5cb2111 <e4d569fe2f436a9b58c048fefabf56eab68c1b7e; patch: 7.3-rc4; bb3aadf7d446aaf22c725b274e2c194ac5cb2111 <a5ad97cbcfcec31430268441c10eedde73200177; patch: 6.12.111; patch: 6.18.53; bb3aadf7d446aaf22c725b274e2c194ac5cb2111 <55ddbc2ca6d5db64d44c3fb8f8705b4d39eb30b7; patch: 0; 6.6; patch: 7.2.7; bb3aadf7d446aaf22c725b274e2c194ac5cb2111 <f7491d7c81db0e7c304a7bd757a76d2fbeaff80e

Die genannten Versionen sind die Angabe der Meldung. Patchlage vergleicht keine Versionsnummern und leitet aus ihnen keine Aussage ab — welche Version installiert ist, muss ein Mensch nachsehen.

Im Produktkatalog geführt

Für diese Produkte kann ein Bestand in Patchlage erfasst werden. Ein Advisory dazu erscheint am Morgen danach im Lagebericht.

• Linux — Linux

Patchlage meldet Treffer und Verdachtsfälle. Zu allem anderen sagt dieses System nichts — weder diese Seite noch der Lagebericht behauptet je, dass ein Bestand sicher ist.