CVE-2026-23077
Unknown Unknown - Not Provided
Use-After-Free in Linux Kernel anon_vma during mremap() Merge

Publication date: 2026-02-04

Last updated on: 2026-04-03

Assigner: kernel.org

Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/vma: fix anon_vma UAF on mremap() faulted, unfaulted merge Patch series "mm/vma: fix anon_vma UAF on mremap() faulted, unfaulted merge", v2. Commit 879bca0a2c4f ("mm/vma: fix incorrectly disallowed anonymous VMA merges") introduced the ability to merge previously unavailable VMA merge scenarios. However, it is handling merges incorrectly when it comes to mremap() of a faulted VMA adjacent to an unfaulted VMA. The issues arise in three cases: 1. Previous VMA unfaulted: copied -----| v |-----------|.............| | unfaulted |(faulted VMA)| |-----------|.............| prev 2. Next VMA unfaulted: copied -----| v |.............|-----------| |(faulted VMA)| unfaulted | |.............|-----------| next 3. Both adjacent VMAs unfaulted: copied -----| v |-----------|.............|-----------| | unfaulted |(faulted VMA)| unfaulted | |-----------|.............|-----------| prev next This series fixes each of these cases, and introduces self tests to assert that the issues are corrected. I also test a further case which was already handled, to assert that my changes continues to correctly handle it: 4. prev unfaulted, next faulted: copied -----| v |-----------|.............|-----------| | unfaulted |(faulted VMA)| faulted | |-----------|.............|-----------| prev next This bug was discovered via a syzbot report, linked to in the first patch in the series, I confirmed that this series fixes the bug. I also discovered that we are failing to check that the faulted VMA was not forked when merging a copied VMA in cases 1-3 above, an issue this series also addresses. I also added self tests to assert that this is resolved (and confirmed that the tests failed prior to this). I also cleaned up vma_expand() as part of this work, renamed vma_had_uncowed_parents() to vma_is_fork_child() as the previous name was unduly confusing, and simplified the comments around this function. This patch (of 4): Commit 879bca0a2c4f ("mm/vma: fix incorrectly disallowed anonymous VMA merges") introduced the ability to merge previously unavailable VMA merge scenarios. The key piece of logic introduced was the ability to merge a faulted VMA immediately next to an unfaulted VMA, which relies upon dup_anon_vma() to correctly handle anon_vma state. In the case of the merge of an existing VMA (that is changing properties of a VMA and then merging if those properties are shared by adjacent VMAs), dup_anon_vma() is invoked correctly. However in the case of the merge of a new VMA, a corner case peculiar to mremap() was missed. The issue is that vma_expand() only performs dup_anon_vma() if the target (the VMA that will ultimately become the merged VMA): is not the next VMA, i.e. the one that appears after the range in which the new VMA is to be established. A key insight here is that in all other cases other than mremap(), a new VMA merge either expands an existing VMA, meaning that the target VMA will be that VMA, or would have anon_vma be NULL. Specifically: * __mmap_region() - no anon_vma in place, initial mapping. * do_brk_flags() - expanding an existing VMA. * vma_merge_extend() - expanding an existing VMA. * relocate_vma_down() - no anon_vma in place, initial mapping. In addition, we are in the unique situation of needing to duplicate anon_vma state from a VMA that is neither the previous or next VMA being merged with. dup_anon_vma() deals exclusively with the target=unfaulted, src=faulted case. This leaves four possibilities, in each case where the copied VMA is faulted: 1. Previous VMA unfaulted: copied -----| ---truncated---
CVSS Scores
EPSS Scores
Probability:
Percentile:
Meta Information
Published
2026-02-04
Last Modified
2026-04-03
Generated
2026-05-07
AI Q&A
2026-02-04
EPSS Evaluated
2026-05-05
NVD
CVE-2026-23077
EUVD
EUVD-2026-5466
Affected Vendors & Products
Showing 6 associated CPEs
Vendor Product Version / Range
linux linux_kernel 6.19
linux linux_kernel 6.19
linux linux_kernel 6.19
linux linux_kernel 6.19
linux linux_kernel 6.19
linux linux_kernel From 6.16 (inc) to 6.18.8 (exc)
Helpful Resources
Exploitability
CWE
CWE Icon
KEV
KEV Icon
CWE ID Description
CWE-416 The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory "belongs" to the code that operates on the new pointer.
Attack-Flow Graph
AI Powered Q&A
Can you explain this vulnerability to me?

This vulnerability is a use-after-free (UAF) issue in the Linux kernel's memory management subsystem, specifically related to anonymous virtual memory area (anon_vma) handling during the mremap() operation.

A patch series fixed incorrect handling of merging faulted and unfaulted VMAs (virtual memory areas) when using mremap(). The problem arose because the kernel incorrectly merged faulted VMAs adjacent to unfaulted VMAs, leading to improper anon_vma state management.

The bug was due to missing checks and incorrect duplication of anon_vma state in certain corner cases during VMA merges, which could cause use-after-free errors.


How can this vulnerability impact me? :

This vulnerability can lead to use-after-free conditions in the kernel's memory management, which may cause system instability, crashes, or potentially allow an attacker to execute arbitrary code with kernel privileges.

Because it affects the kernel's handling of memory mappings, exploitation could compromise system security, leading to privilege escalation or denial of service.


How does this vulnerability affect compliance with common standards and regulations (like GDPR, HIPAA)?:

I don't know


How can this vulnerability be detected on my network or system? Can you suggest some commands?

I don't know


What immediate steps should I take to mitigate this vulnerability?

I don't know


Ask Our AI Assistant
Need more information? Ask your question to get an AI reply (Powered by our expertise)
0/70
EPSS Chart