FlawAtlas
Search the atlas
CVE-2022-49732 Not scored

sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check Commit 8a59f9d1e3d4 ("sock: Introduce sk->sk_prot->psock_update_sk_prot()") has moved the inet_csk_has_ulp(sk) check from sk_psock_init() to the new tcp_bpf_update_proto() function. I'm guessing that this was done to allow creating psocks for non-inet sockets. Unfortunately the destruction path for psock includes the ULP unwind, so we need to fail the sk_psock_init() itself. Otherwise if ULP is already present we'll notice that later, and call tcp_update_ulp() with the sk_proto of the ULP itself, which will most likely result in the ULP looping its callbacks.

Exploit probability 0.2%
Published February 26, 2025
Required by Not available
Last source change August 12, 2026

02 / AFFECTED SOFTWARE

Affected packages

Linux Kernel
Unknown Unknown

03 / CONNECTIONS

Connected vulnerabilities

04 / EVIDENCE

Source records

Open Source Vulnerabilities CVE-2022-49732

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check Commit 8a59f9d1e3d4 ("sock: Introduce sk->sk_prot->psock_update_sk_prot()") has moved the inet_csk_has_ulp(sk) check from sk_psock_init() to the new tcp_bpf_update_proto() function. I'm guessing that this was done to allow creating psocks for non-inet sockets. Unfortunately the destruction path for psock includes the ULP unwind, so we need to fail the sk_psock_init() itself. Otherwise if ULP is already present we'll notice that later, and call tcp_update_ulp() with the sk_proto of the ULP itself, which will most likely result in the ULP looping its callbacks.

View original source

05 / REFERENCES

Further evidence