CVE-2026-80893
Vulnerability Scoring
Status: Received on 04 Sep 2026, 18:17 UTC
Published on: 04 Sep 2026, 18:17 UTC
CVSS Release:
CVE-2026-80893: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/hugetlb: fix swap entry corruption when clearing uffd-wp at fork() copy_hugetlb_page_range() clears the uffd-wp bit of migration and hwpoison entries with huge_pte_clear_uffd_wp(), which operates on the present-PTE bit position. Swap entries keep the uffd-wp state elsewhere -- the migration branch reads and sets it with pte_swp_uffd_wp() and pte_swp_mkuffd_wp() -- and the present-PTE position falls into the swap payload. On x86-64 it lands in the inverted swap offset, where a naturally-aligned hugetlb PFN always has the affected bit set, so the clear advances the encoded PFN by two pages. No userfaultfd needs to be involved: the clear is guarded only by the child VMA not being uffd-wp registered, so a plain fork() with an in-flight hugetlb migration entry (or a poisoned hugetlb page) corrupts the entry copied into the child. Instrumenting the clear and forking after MADV_HWPOISON on a 2MB anon hugetlb page shows: offset before=120e00 offset after =120e02 The fallout is mostly latent: rmap walks match migration entries by folio range and remove_migration_pte() rebuilds the PTE from the folio, so a within-folio PFN skew heals once migration completes. But any path that re-encodes the corrupted offset -- e.g. hugetlb_change_protection() rewriting a writable migration entry via make_readable_migration_entry(swp_offset(entry)) -- propagates it. Migration entries legitimately carry uffd-wp, so clear it with pte_swp_clear_uffd_wp(), matching copy_nonpresent_pte() and move_huge_pte(). A hwpoison entry, on the other hand, never carries the uffd-wp bit: it is installed fresh by make_hwpoison_entry() (try_to_unmap_one() does not preserve uffd-wp on the hwpoison path) and hugetlb_change_protection() leaves hwpoison entries untouched. There was nothing to clear there, only the corruption, so drop the clear entirely.
The exploitability of CVE-2026-80893 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).
No exploitability data is available for CVE-2026-80893.
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.
Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2026-80893, 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.
Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2026-80893, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.
Unknown
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.