CVE-2026-64102
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
RDMA/siw: Reject MPA FPDU length underflow before signed receive math
A malicious connected siw peer can send an iWARP FPDU whose MPA length field (c_hdr->mpa_len, 16 bit big-endian, peer-controlled) is smaller than the fixed DDP/RDMAP header for the announced opcode. Soft-iWARP parses the full header in siw_get_hdr() based on iwarp_pktinfo[opcode] .hdr_len, but never compares mpa_len against that header length.
siw_tcp_rx_data() then derives
srx->fpdu_part_rem = be16_to_cpu(mpa_len) - fpdu_part_rcvd
+ MPA_HDR_SIZE;
where fpdu_part_rcvd equals iwarp_pktinfo[opcode].hdr_len at this point. For a tagged WRITE (hdr_len 16, MPA_HDR_SIZE 2) the smallest on-wire mpa_len of 0 yields fpdu_part_rem = -14, and any mpa_len below hdr_len - MPA_HDR_SIZE underflows to a negative int.
The signed value then flows into siw_proc_write()/siw_proc_rresp() as
bytes = min(srx->fpdu_part_rem, srx->skb_new);
is handed to siw_check_mem() as an int len (whose interval check addr + len > mem->va + mem->len is satisfied for a valid base when len is negative), and reaches siw_rx_data() -> siw_rx_kva() / siw_rx_umem() -> skb_copy_bits() as a signed copy length. The header copy branch in skb_copy_bits() promotes that to size_t, producing a multi-gigabyte read.
KASAN under a KUnit harness that drives the real kernel TCP receive path -- a loopback AF_INET socketpair, the malformed FPDU written via kernel_sendmsg, sk_data_ready firing in softirq, tcp_read_sock dispatching to siw_tcp_rx_data -- reports:
BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in skb_copy_bits+0x284/0x480
Read of size 4294967295 at addr ffff888...
Call Trace:
skb_copy_bits
siw_rx_kva
siw_rx_data
siw_check_mem
siw_proc_write
siw_tcp_rx_data
__tcp_read_sock
siw_qp_llp_data_ready
tcp_data_ready
tcp_data_queue
Add the missing invariant at the earliest point where the peer header is fully assembled. iwarp_pktinfo[*].hdr_len - MPA_HDR_SIZE is exactly the value the siw transmitter uses as the minimum mpa_len for each opcode (drivers/infiniband/sw/siw/siw_qp.c:33), so this matches the protocol contract. Out-of-range FPDUs terminate the connection with TERM_ERROR_LAYER_LLP / LLP_ETYPE_MPA / LLP_ECODE_FPDU_START -- which is RFC 5044 Section 8 error code 3 ("Marker and ULPDU Length fields do not agree on the start of an FPDU"), the correct framing-error class for this inconsistency.
No affected software listed.
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/0ce1bc9e46ecabe84772bb561e373c0d9876d6f2
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1012896f4225e8f801ff3c1648023845b66dfb11
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/14553be882d9ce91749c9d64041de66e34ad8e70
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/33a8b5e971e294ec2a7b74211c545e09efd8e9ac
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4a331582011d9e8089af8aa2a61ec6b4443bb245
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/683f7cfbf514193d63c0efa079f3352bde84c2e0
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/775b4dc9618a99a1fa48b57554041a5dc17e1336
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c7c0c0f4379dedec12d24dbb9dded5d2db7fd9f2
Deep Security Visibility Without the Complexity
SynScan provides clear, real-time security insights so you can monitor your attack surface, spot risks early, and act fast—without extra complexity.
- No setup fees
- 5-min deployment
- Cancel anytime
Frequently Asked Questions
A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.
CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.
A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.
Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.
Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.
SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.