Skip to main content
No exploitation reported

CVE-2026-99112

net/sched: cls_flower: validate mask pointer after nla_next()

No exploitation reported by the sources we read.

  • Published2026-10-28

Am I affected?

With a domain, we read the version its public headers and pages expose. A distribution build can carry the fix under an older number.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: cls_flower: validate mask pointer after nla_next() fl_set_enc_opt() iterates the key's nested tunnel-option attributes with nla_for_each_attr() while advancing a single mask pointer via nla_next() at the bottom of each loop, so the mask cursor is driven by the number of key attributes rather than by the mask's own attributes. The nla_ok() added by commit c96adff956191 ("cls_flower: call nla_ok() before nla_next()") only validates the mask pointer that was just consumed; the pointer produced by nla_next() is used by the next iteration (fl_set_geneve_opt() and siblings) without any validation. The mask's nested attributes are validated with NL_VALIDATE_LIBERAL, which merely warns on trailing bytes that do not form a complete attribute. A mask carrying one valid attribute plus 1-3 residue bytes (or a non-aligned attribute length making msk_depth negative) therefore reaches the next iteration with msk_depth != 0, so neither the !msk_depth check in fl_set_enc_opt() nor the !depth check in the per-type helpers fires. nla_type() then reads past the mask payload and nla_parse_nested_deprecated() iterates with an nla_len taken from those bytes, reading well beyond the mask attribute (KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds read in __nla_validate_parse from fl_change()). Validate the advanced mask pointer as well: when the mask is not legitimately exhausted (msk_depth != 0) and the new pointer fails nla_ok(), reject the filter with -EINVAL. An exactly exhausted mask still skips the check, preserving exact-match behaviour for the remaining key attributes.

Timeline

dates in UTC
  1. 2026-10-2811:17CVE publishedNVD

Observed activity

isMalicious corpus · updated 2026-10-31 15:37 UTC
Indicators tagged with this CVE, per day0 indicators over 7 days
Block these indicators
  • Firewall list (EDL, text): https://api.ismalicious.com/edl/cve/CVE-2026-99112?format=txt
  • CSV export: https://api.ismalicious.com/edl/cve/CVE-2026-99112?format=csv
  • TAXII collection of exploited CVEs
  • The EDL and CSV take an API key on the Pro plan.

Versions per branch

Distribution builds and vendor advisories

Packages from OSV.dev and products from the vendors' CSAF advisories.

version not verifiedVersions not verified: read as OSV.dev and the vendors publish them, not checked against each vendor's release list.

Vendor advisories

  • CVE-2026-99112 Red Hat Product Security236 known affected

    kernel: net/sched: cls_flower: validate mask pointer after nla_next()

    kernel as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 · kernel-64k as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 · kernel-64k-core as a component of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 · +233 more

Full record on NVD

Fix

  1. No fix available, says the vendor Red Hat Product Security CVE-2026-99112 · 236 productsFix deferred

Detection

Nuclei template
none so far
ProjectDiscovery
Exploit-DB
no entry
Exploit-DB
Proof-of-concept repositories
none listed
PoC-in-GitHub

Sources

  • NVDCVE recordread 2026-10-31
  • CNACVSS 3.17.1read 2026-10-31
  • FIRST EPSSEPSS score0.2 %2026-10-30

Technical details

CVSS v3 Vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H
Published
2026-10-28
Last Modified
2026-10-31
NVD status
Received

Frequently asked questions

What is CVE-2026-99112?

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: cls_flower: validate mask pointer after nla_next() fl_set_enc_opt() iterates the key's nested tunnel-option attributes with nla_for_each_attr() while advancing a single mask pointer via nla_next() at the bottom of each loop, so the mask cursor is driven by the number of key attributes rather than by the mask's own attributes. The nla_ok() added by commit c96adff956191 ("cls_flower: call nla_ok() before nla_next()") only validates the mask pointer that was just consumed; the pointer produced by nla_next() is used by the next iteration (fl_set_geneve_opt() and siblings) without any validation. The mask's nested attributes are validated with NL_VALIDATE_LIBERAL, which merely warns on trailing bytes that do not form a complete attribute. A mask carrying one valid attribute plus 1-3 residue bytes (or a non-aligned attribute length making msk_depth negative) therefore reaches the next iteration with msk_depth != 0, so neither the !msk_depth check in fl_set_enc_opt() nor the !depth check in the per-type helpers fires. nla_type() then reads past the mask payload and nla_parse_nested_deprecated() iterates with an nla_len taken from those bytes, reading well beyond the mask attribute (KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds read in __nla_validate_parse from fl_change()). Validate the advanced mask pointer as well: when the mask is not legitimately exhausted (msk_depth != 0) and the new pointer fails nla_ok(), reject the filter with -EINVAL. An exactly exhausted mask still skips the check, preserving exact-match behaviour for the remaining key attributes.

Is CVE-2026-99112 actively exploited?

Active exploitation of CVE-2026-99112 has not been confirmed. Its EPSS score was 0.2% on 2026-10-30, the estimated probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.

What is the CVSS score for CVE-2026-99112?

CVE-2026-99112 has a CVSS v3 base score of 7.1 (HIGH severity), with vector string CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H.

Running Linux kernel? Hear about its next vulnerability

Surveillance reads the versions in your stack — a domain, a lockfile or a list — checks each CVE against the ranges its sources publish, and alerts you when one you run is exploited or enters CISA KEV. A version it cannot read stays « version not verified ».

Get alerts for this productCISA KEV additions, October 2026Search CVEs

No credit card required · No monthly cap on website lookups · 250 API requests/month

Go further

Related vulnerabilities

Same product first, then the same vendor advisory and the same publication week.

Back to CVE Database