CVE-2022-50069 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2022-50069
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress
Analysis In Progress

Attack Complexity Details

  • Attack Complexity:
    Attack Complexity Analysis In Progress
  • Attack Vector:
    Attack Vector Under Analysis
  • Privileges Required: None
    No authentication is required for exploitation.
  • Scope:
    Impact is confined to the initially vulnerable component.
  • User Interaction: None
    No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2022-50069 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Published on: 18 Jun 2025, 11:15 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2022-50069 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2022-50069: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: BPF: Fix potential bad pointer dereference in bpf_sys_bpf() The bpf_sys_bpf() helper function allows an eBPF program to load another eBPF program from within the kernel. In this case the argument union bpf_attr pointer (as well as the insns and license pointers inside) is a kernel address instead of a userspace address (which is the case of a usual bpf() syscall). To make the memory copying process in the syscall work in both cases, bpfptr_t was introduced to wrap around the pointer and distinguish its origin. Specifically, when copying memory contents from a bpfptr_t, a copy_from_user() is performed in case of a userspace address and a memcpy() is performed for a kernel address. This can lead to problems because the in-kernel pointer is never checked for validity. The problem happens when an eBPF syscall program tries to call bpf_sys_bpf() to load a program but provides a bad insns pointer -- say 0xdeadbeef -- in the bpf_attr union. The helper calls __sys_bpf() which would then call bpf_prog_load() to load the program. bpf_prog_load() is responsible for copying the eBPF instructions to the newly allocated memory for the program; it creates a kernel bpfptr_t for insns and invokes copy_from_bpfptr(). Internally, all bpfptr_t operations are backed by the corresponding sockptr_t operations, which performs direct memcpy() on kernel pointers for copy_from/strncpy_from operations. Therefore, the code is always happy to dereference the bad pointer to trigger a un-handle-able page fault and in turn an oops. However, this is not supposed to happen because at that point the eBPF program is already verified and should not cause a memory error. Sample KASAN trace: [ 25.685056][ T228] ================================================================== [ 25.685680][ T228] BUG: KASAN: user-memory-access in copy_from_bpfptr+0x21/0x30 [ 25.686210][ T228] Read of size 80 at addr 00000000deadbeef by task poc/228 [ 25.686732][ T228] [ 25.686893][ T228] CPU: 3 PID: 228 Comm: poc Not tainted 5.19.0-rc7 #7 [ 25.687375][ T228] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS d55cb5a 04/01/2014 [ 25.687991][ T228] Call Trace: [ 25.688223][ T228] <TASK> [ 25.688429][ T228] dump_stack_lvl+0x73/0x9e [ 25.688747][ T228] print_report+0xea/0x200 [ 25.689061][ T228] ? copy_from_bpfptr+0x21/0x30 [ 25.689401][ T228] ? _printk+0x54/0x6e [ 25.689693][ T228] ? _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x70/0xd0 [ 25.690071][ T228] ? copy_from_bpfptr+0x21/0x30 [ 25.690412][ T228] kasan_report+0xb5/0xe0 [ 25.690716][ T228] ? copy_from_bpfptr+0x21/0x30 [ 25.691059][ T228] kasan_check_range+0x2bd/0x2e0 [ 25.691405][ T228] ? copy_from_bpfptr+0x21/0x30 [ 25.691734][ T228] memcpy+0x25/0x60 [ 25.692000][ T228] copy_from_bpfptr+0x21/0x30 [ 25.692328][ T228] bpf_prog_load+0x604/0x9e0 [ 25.692653][ T228] ? cap_capable+0xb4/0xe0 [ 25.692956][ T228] ? security_capable+0x4f/0x70 [ 25.693324][ T228] __sys_bpf+0x3af/0x580 [ 25.693635][ T228] bpf_sys_bpf+0x45/0x240 [ 25.693937][ T228] bpf_prog_f0ec79a5a3caca46_bpf_func1+0xa2/0xbd [ 25.694394][ T228] bpf_prog_run_pin_on_cpu+0x2f/0xb0 [ 25.694756][ T228] bpf_prog_test_run_syscall+0x146/0x1c0 [ 25.695144][ T228] bpf_prog_test_run+0x172/0x190 [ 25.695487][ T228] __sys_bpf+0x2c5/0x580 [ 25.695776][ T228] __x64_sys_bpf+0x3a/0x50 [ 25.696084][ T228] do_syscall_64+0x60/0x90 [ 25.696393][ T228] ? fpregs_assert_state_consistent+0x50/0x60 [ 25.696815][ T228] ? exit_to_user_mode_prepare+0x36/0xa0 [ 25.697202][ T228] ? syscall_exit_to_user_mode+0x20/0x40 [ 25.697586][ T228] ? do_syscall_64+0x6e/0x90 [ 25.697899][ T228] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd [ 25.698312][ T228] RIP: 0033:0x7f6d543fb759 [ 25.698624][ T228] Code: 08 5b 89 e8 5d c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 90 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d ---truncated---

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2022-50069

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2022-50069 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2022-50069

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2022-50069.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2022-50069, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2022-50069, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2022-50069 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2022-50069 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2022-50069 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2022-50069 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2022-50069: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

  • CVE-2025-7712 – The Madara - Core plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to arbitrary file deletion due to insufficient file path validation in the wp_manga_delete_zip...
  • CVE-2025-7729 – A vulnerability classified as problematic was found in Scada-LTS up to 2.7.8.1. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the f...
  • CVE-2025-7728 – A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in Scada-LTS up to 2.7.8.1. Affected is an unknown function of the file users.shtm. The ma...
  • CVE-2025-5396 – The Bears Backup plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Remote Code Execution in all versions up to, and including, 2.0.0. This is due to the bbacku...
  • CVE-2025-34132 – A command injection vulnerability exists in LILIN Digital Video Recorder (DVR) devices prior to firmware version 2.0b60_20200207 via the Server fie...