We use necessary cookies to keep DataHouse.pl working and optional cookies for analytics and marketing. You can accept all, reject optional cookies, or configure your choices.

OK, I AGREE I DISAGREE CHANGE THE CONSENTS

Thanks to cookies and similar technologies (hereinafter referred to as "cookies"), we can improve the functionality of our website and display content tailored to your needs and expectations.

For more information on the use of cookies, please see our [Cookie Policy].

I agree to:

Analytical use of cookies

Marketing use of cookies

Use of necessary cookies (always active)

Your preferences regarding cookies, expressed after logging in to the website, will be assigned to your Datahouse.pl account. This ensures that it is also saved if you sign in to your account from another device or browser.

CONFIRM SELECTION CANCEL

CVE-2026-53003

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: pppoe: drop PFC frames RFC 2516 Section 7 states that Protocol Field Compression (PFC) is NOT RECOMMENDED for PPPoE. In practice, pppd does not support negotiating PFC for PPPoE sessions, and the current PPPoE driver assumes an uncompressed (2-byte) protocol field. However, the generic PPP layer function ppp_input() is not aware of the negotiation result, and still accepts PFC frames. If a peer with a broken implementation or an attacker sends a frame with a compressed (1-byte) protocol field, the subsequent PPP payload is shifted by one byte. This causes the network header to be 4-byte misaligned, which may trigger unaligned access exceptions on some architectures. To reduce the attack surface, drop PPPoE PFC frames. Introduce ppp_skb_is_compressed_proto() helper function to be used in both ppp_generic.c and pppoe.c to avoid open-coding.

CVE-2026-53003CVSS 7.5Linux

CVE-2026-53003

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: pppoe: drop PFC frames RFC 2516 Section 7 states that Protocol Field Compression (PFC) is NOT RECOMMENDED for PPPoE. In practice, pppd does not support negotiating PFC for PPPoE sessions, and the current PPPoE driver assumes an uncompressed (2-byte) protocol field. However, the generic PPP layer function ppp_input() is not aware of the negotiation result, and still accepts PFC frames. If a peer with a broken implementation or an attacker sends a frame with a compressed (1-byte) protocol field, the subsequent PPP payload is shifted by one byte. This causes the network header to be 4-byte misaligned, which may trigger unaligned access exceptions on some architectures. To reduce the attack surface, drop PPPoE PFC frames. Introduce ppp_skb_is_compressed_proto() helper function to be used in both ppp_generic.c and pppoe.c to avoid open-coding.

CVSS: 7.5 HIGH
EPSS: 39.65%
Known exploited: not in KEV
Product: -

What is known

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: pppoe: drop PFC frames RFC 2516 Section 7 states that Protocol Field Compression (PFC) is NOT RECOMMENDED for PPPoE. In practice, pppd does not support negotiating PFC for PPPoE sessions, and the current PPPoE driver assumes an uncompressed (2-byte) protocol field. However, the generic PPP layer function ppp_input() is not aware of the negotiation result, and still accepts PFC frames. If a peer with a broken implementation or an attacker sends a frame with a compressed (1-byte) protocol field, the subsequent PPP payload is shifted by one byte. This causes the network header to be 4-byte misaligned, which may trigger unaligned access exceptions on some architectures. To reduce the attack surface, drop PPPoE PFC frames. Introduce ppp_skb_is_compressed_proto() helper function to be used in both ppp_generic.c and pppoe.c to avoid open-coding.

Sources

Back to security hub Contact DataHouse