Unknown

CVE-2025-40143 — bpf: dont report verifier bug for missing bpf_scc_visit on speculative path

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: dont report verifier bug for missing bpf_scc_visit on speculative path Syzbot generated a program that triggers a verifier_bug() call in maybe_exit_scc(). maybe_exit_scc() assumes that, when called for a state with insn_idx in some SCC, there should be an instance of struct bpf_scc_visit allocated for that SCC. Turns out the assumption does not hold for speculative execution paths. See example in the next patch. maybe_scc_exit() is called from update_branch_counts() for states that reach branch count of zero, meaning that path exploration for a particular path is finished. Path exploration can finish in one of three ways: a. Verification error is found. In this case, update_branch_counts() is called only for non-speculative paths. b. Top level BPF_EXIT is reached. Such instructions are never a part of an SCC, so compute_scc_callchain() in maybe_scc_exit() will return false, and maybe_scc_exit() will return early. c. A checkpoint is reached and matched. Checkpoints are created by is_state_visited(), which calls maybe_enter_scc(), which allocates bpf_scc_visit instances for checkpoints within SCCs. Hence, for non-speculative symbolic execution paths, the assumption still holds: if maybe_scc_exit() is called for a state within an SCC, bpf_scc_visit instance must exist. This patch removes the verifier_bug() call for speculative paths.

Published Nov 12, 2025 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: Linux

Low

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.

How the score was calculated

EPSS 0.3% (30-day exploitation probability)+3

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation

Not confirmed

Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.

EPSS FIRST

0.26%

ahead of 17% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026

Affects

Linux

CVSS base

—

Score not published yet.

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Linux Linux).
No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status	Source
Linux	Linux	≥ c9e31900b54cadf5398dfb838c0a63effa1defec and < 3861e7c4324aa20a632fb74eb3904114f6afdb57≥ c9e31900b54cadf5398dfb838c0a63effa1defec and < a3c73d629ea1373af3c0c954d41fd1af555492e3version 6.17	Vulnerable	CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.26%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

Not enough vector or weakness data: use the affected application’s logs as a starting point.

application logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

2026
Record published
Oct 13, 2026
Affected products added · linux/linux
Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Source status changed · → Deferred
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
Record created in this database
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
2025
CVE published
Nov 12, 2025 · Linux

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

2 on the record

git.kernel.org/stable/c/3861e7c4324aa20a632fb74eb3904114f6afdb57
NIST National Vulnerability Database
git.kernel.org/stable/c/a3c73d629ea1373af3c0c954d41fd1af555492e3
NIST National Vulnerability Database

Elsewhere on this site

Linux
every CVE for this vendor

Related CVEs (same products)

Critical CVE-2026-99999 ipv4: validate checksum_start before completing checksum 8h
Unknown CVE-2026-98432 ipv4: free inet_opt and ireq_opt after an RCU grace period 8h
Unknown CVE-2026-98424 wifi: cfg80211: undo netns switch if renaming the wiphy fails 1d
Unknown CVE-2026-98425 wifi: mac80211: don't warn when an IBSS has no channel to scan 1d
Unknown CVE-2026-98426 wifi: mwifiex: fix IRQ leak using wrong index in MSI-X error path 1d
Unknown CVE-2026-98427 net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call 1d

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

No CVSS score published by NVD, the CNA, CISA or GitHub so far.
No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
No CISA SSVC assessment.
No CWE classification.
No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2025-40143 is "bpf: dont report verifier bug for missing bpf_scc_visit on speculative path", rated Unknown. It affects Linux (Linux); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. EPSS 0.26% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.