You are viewing this page in an unauthorized frame window.
This is a potential security issue, you are being redirected to
https://nvd.nist.gov
An official website of the United States government
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock () or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.
This CVE record has been updated after NVD enrichment efforts were completed. Enrichment data supplied by the NVD may require amendment due to these changes.
Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ipvlan: Make the addrs_lock be per port
Make the addrs_lock be per port, not per ipvlan dev.
Initial code seems to be written in the assumption,
that any address change must occur under RTNL.
But it is not so for the case of IPv6. So
1) Introduce per-port addrs_lock.
2) It was needed to fix places where it was forgotten
to take lock (ipvlan_open/ipvlan_close)
This appears to be a very minor problem though.
Since it's highly unlikely that ipvlan_add_addr() will
be called on 2 CPU simultaneously. But nevertheless,
this could cause:
1) False-negative of ipvlan_addr_busy(): one interface
iterated through all port->ipvlans + ipvlan->addrs
under some ipvlan spinlock, and another added IP
under its own lock. Though this is only possible
for IPv6, since looks like only ipvlan_addr6_event() can be
called without rtnl_lock.
2) Race since ipvlan_ht_addr_add(port) is called under
different ipvlan->addrs_lock locks
This should not affect performance, since add/remove IP
is a rare situation and spinlock is not taken on fast
paths.
Metrics
NVD enrichment efforts reference publicly available information to associate
vector strings. CVSS information contributed by other sources is also
displayed.
By selecting these links, you will be leaving NIST webspace.
We have provided these links to other web sites because they
may have information that would be of interest to you. No
inferences should be drawn on account of other sites being
referenced, or not, from this page. There may be other web
sites that are more appropriate for your purpose. NIST does
not necessarily endorse the views expressed, or concur with
the facts presented on these sites. Further, NIST does not
endorse any commercial products that may be mentioned on
these sites. Please address comments about this page to [email protected].
OR
*cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:*
*cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:*
*cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc3:*:*:*:*:*:*
*cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc4:*:*:*:*:*:*
*cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc5:*:*:*:*:*:*
*cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 5.11 up to (excluding) 5.15.199
*cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 5.16 up to (excluding) 6.1.162
*cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 6.2 up to (excluding) 6.6.122
*cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 6.7 up to (excluding) 6.12.68
*cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 6.13 up to (excluding) 6.18.8
*cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc6:*:*:*:*:*:*
*cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* versions from (including) 4.17 up to (excluding) 5.10.249
New CVE Received from kernel.org2/04/2026 12:16:21 PM
Action
Type
Old Value
New Value
Added
Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ipvlan: Make the addrs_lock be per port
Make the addrs_lock be per port, not per ipvlan dev.
Initial code seems to be written in the assumption,
that any address change must occur under RTNL.
But it is not so for the case of IPv6. So
1) Introduce per-port addrs_lock.
2) It was needed to fix places where it was forgotten
to take lock (ipvlan_open/ipvlan_close)
This appears to be a very minor problem though.
Since it's highly unlikely that ipvlan_add_addr() will
be called on 2 CPU simultaneously. But nevertheless,
this could cause:
1) False-negative of ipvlan_addr_busy(): one interface
iterated through all port->ipvlans + ipvlan->addrs
under some ipvlan spinlock, and another added IP
under its own lock. Though this is only possible
for IPv6, since looks like only ipvlan_addr6_event() can be
called without rtnl_lock.
2) Race since ipvlan_ht_addr_add(port) is called under
different ipvlan->addrs_lock locks
This should not affect performance, since add/remove IP
is a rare situation and spinlock is not taken on fast
paths.
) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.
