CVE-2026-64109

Summary

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

af_unix: Fix UAF read of tail->len in unix_stream_data_wait()

unix_stream_data_wait() does skb_peek_tail(&sk->sk_receive_queue) without holding any lock that prevents SKBs on that queue from being dequeued and freed. This has been the case since commit 79f632c71bea ("unix/stream: fix peeking with an offset larger than data in queue"). The first consequence of this is that the pointer comparison tail != last can be false even if last semantically refers to an already-freed SKB while tail is a new SKB allocated at the same address; which can cause unix_stream_data_wait() to wrongly keep blocking after new data has arrived, but only in a weird scenario where a peeking recv() and a normal recv() on the same socket are racing, which is probably not a real problem.

But since commit 2b514574f7e8 ("net: af_unix: implement splice for stream af_unix sockets"), tail is actually dereferenced, which can cause UAF in the following race scenario (where test_setup() runs single-threaded, and afterwards, test_thread1() and test_thread2() run concurrently in two threads:

static int socks[2];
void test_setup(void) {
  socketpair(AF_UNIX, SOCK_STREAM, 0, socks);
  send(socks[1], "A", 1, 0);
  int peekoff = 1;
  setsockopt(socks[0], SOL_SOCKET, SO_PEEK_OFF, &peekoff, sizeof(peekoff));
}
void test_thread1(void) {
  char dummy;
  recv(socks[0], &dummy, 1, MSG_PEEK);
}
void test_thread2(void) {
  char dummy;
  recv(socks[0], &dummy, 1, 0);
  shutdown(socks[1], SHUT_WR);
}

when racing like this:

thread1                       thread2
unix_stream_read_generic
  mutex_lock(&u->iolock)
  skb_peek(&sk->sk_receive_queue)
  skb_peek_next(skb, &sk->sk_receive_queue)
  mutex_unlock(&u->iolock)
                              unix_stream_read_generic
                                unix_state_lock(sk)
                                skb_peek(&sk->sk_receive_queue)
                                unix_state_unlock(sk)
  unix_stream_data_wait
    unix_state_lock(sk)
    tail = skb_peek_tail(&sk->sk_receive_queue)
                                spin_lock(&sk->sk_receive_queue.lock)
                                __skb_unlink(skb, &sk->sk_receive_queue)
                                spin_unlock(&sk->sk_receive_queue.lock)
                                consume_skb(skb) [frees the SKB]
    `tail != last`: false
    `tail`: true
    `tail->len != last_len` ***UAF***

Fix the UAF by removing the read of tail->len; checking tail->len would only make sense if SKBs in the receive queue of a UNIX socket could grow, which can no longer happen.

Kuniyuki explained:

> When commit 869e7c62486e ("net: af_unix: implement stream sendpage > support") added sendpage() support, data could be appended to the last > skb in the receiver's queue. > > That's why we needed to check if the length of the last skb was changed > while waiting for new data in unix_stream_data_wait(). > > However, commit a0dbf5f818f9 ("af_unix: Support MSG_SPLICE_PAGES") and > commit 57d44a354a43 ("unix: Convert unix_stream_sendpage() to use > MSG_SPLICE_PAGES") refactored sendmsg(), and now data is always added > to a new skb.

That means this fix is not suitable for kernels before 6.5.

Affected Software

VendorProductVersion RangeStatus
LinuxLinux2b514574f7e88c8498027ee366fd6e7aae5aa4b5 < 26342087fac93b3932e6af61dc91ec029cb8a623affected
LinuxLinux2b514574f7e88c8498027ee366fd6e7aae5aa4b5 < 38bccb927d83d7d52e5b20015a172a0b6101d11eaffected
LinuxLinux2b514574f7e88c8498027ee366fd6e7aae5aa4b5 < acdff9907478e82208475b1151700d0b71dcdc63affected
LinuxLinux2b514574f7e88c8498027ee366fd6e7aae5aa4b5 < 5f162f95a95834f06a8ec6140889272ad12e842faffected
LinuxLinux2b514574f7e88c8498027ee366fd6e7aae5aa4b5 < be309f8eae8b474a4a617eaae01324da996fc719affected
LinuxLinux4.2affected
LinuxLinux0 < 4.2unaffected
LinuxLinux6.6.143 <= 6.6.*unaffected
LinuxLinux6.12.92 <= 6.12.*unaffected
LinuxLinux6.18.34 <= 6.18.*unaffected
LinuxLinux7.0.11 <= 7.0.*unaffected
LinuxLinux7.1 <= *unaffected

Weaknesses

References