Analytical use of cookies
CVE-2026-31590: linux kernel vulnerability
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: KVM: SEV: Drop WARN on large size for KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_REG_REGION Drop the WARN in sev_pin_memory() on npages overflowing an int, as the WARN is comically trivially to trigger from userspace, e.g. by doing: struct kvm_enc_region range = { .addr = 0, .size = -1ul, }; __vm_ioctl(vm, KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_REG_REGION, &range); Note, the checks in sev_mem_enc_register_region() that presumably exist to verify the incoming address+size are completely worthless, as both "addr" and "size" are u64s and SEV is 64-bit only, i.e. they _can't_ be greater than ULONG_MAX. That wart will be cleaned up in the near future. if (range->addr > ULONG_MAX || range->size > ULONG_MAX) return -EINVAL; Opportunistically add a comment to explain why the code calculates the number of pages the "hard" way, e.g. instead of just shifting @ulen.
- CVSS
- 5.5 MEDIUM
- EPSS
- 2.59%
- Known exploited
- not in KEV
- Product
- linux kernel
What is known
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: KVM: SEV: Drop WARN on large size for KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_REG_REGION Drop the WARN in sev_pin_memory() on npages overflowing an int, as the WARN is comically trivially to trigger from userspace, e.g. by doing: struct kvm_enc_region range = { .addr = 0, .size = -1ul, }; __vm_ioctl(vm, KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_REG_REGION, &range); Note, the checks in sev_mem_enc_register_region() that presumably exist to verify the incoming address+size are completely worthless, as both "addr" and "size" are u64s and SEV is 64-bit only, i.e. they _can't_ be greater than ULONG_MAX. That wart will be cleaned up in the near future. if (range->addr > ULONG_MAX || range->size > ULONG_MAX) return -EINVAL; Opportunistically add a comment to explain why the code calculates the number of pages the "hard" way, e.g. instead of just shifting @ulen.