In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: octeontx2-af: validate body pcifunc in rvu_mbox_handler_rep_event_notify rvu_mbox_handler_rep_event_notify() in drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/ octeontx2/af/rvu_rep.c queues a sender-controlled REP_EVENT_NOTIFY request body verbatim, and rvu_rep_up_notify() then forwards event->pcifunc (the nested body field, distinct from the AF-normalised header pcifunc) into rvu_get_pfvf(), rvu_get_pf() and the AF->PF mailbox device index without any bounds check
Why It Matters
Analysis dossierWhy It Matters
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: octeontx2-af: validate body pcifunc in rvu_mbox_handler_rep_event_notify rvu_mbox_handler_rep_event_notify() in drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/ octeontx2/af/rvu_rep.c queues a sender-controlled REP_EVENT_NOTIFY request body verbatim, and rvu_rep_up_notify() then forwards event->pcifunc (the nested body field, distinct from the AF-normalised header pcifunc) into rvu_get_pfvf(), rvu_get_pf() and the AF->PF mailbox device index without any bounds check. A VF attached to a PF that has been put into switchdev representor mode reaches this path: the VF mailbox handler otx2_pfvf_mbox_handler() forwards every message id including MBOX_MSG_REP_EVENT_NOTIFY to AF without an allowlist, and the AF dispatcher rewrites only msg->pcifunc, leaving struct rep_event::pcifunc attacker-controlled. The sibling rvu_mbox_handler_esw_cfg() refuses requests whose header pcifunc is not rvu->rep_pcifunc; this handler has no equivalent gate. An out-of-range body pcifunc selects an &rvu->pf[]/&rvu->hwvf[] element past the allocated array and, for RVU_EVENT_MAC_ADDR_CHANGE, turns into a six-byte attacker-chosen OOB ether_addr_copy() target inside the queued worker; KASAN reports a slab-out-of-bounds write in rvu_rep_wq_handler. Reject malformed requests at the handler entry by gating on is_pf_func_valid(), which is already the canonical PF/VF range check in this driver; expose it via rvu.h so callers in rvu_rep.c can use it instead of open-coding the same range arithmetic.
High
Unknown
Unknown
Risk basis: SOC ecosystem technology relevance; HIGH severity; No confirmed exploitation signal in current enrichment
Affected Products & Remediation
0 source-backed productsVendor or catalog guidance (source)
Not provided by source
Known exploitation (source facts)
Only what a source states. Unknown means no source has said either way; it is not "not exploited".
- CISA KEV
- Unknown
- Exploited (source statement)
- Unknown
- Publicly disclosed (source)
- Unknown
Suggested hunting (rule-based inference)
SecOps Signal recommendation (rule-based inference). These steps are hunting hypotheses from the vulnerability class; they do not state or imply that exploitation occurred here or anywhere.
Matched local-privilege-escalation (CVSS AV:L, CVSS PR:L)
Exposure
- Identify hosts reporting this CVE, prioritising shared or multi-user systems.Telemetry: DeviceTvmSoftwareVulnerabilities · A local, low-privilege vector matters most where untrusted users can run code. · Rule local-privilege-escalation
Exploitation evidence
- Look for low-privileged processes spawning SYSTEM or root-level child processes on affected hosts.Telemetry: DeviceProcessEvents · Hunting hypothesis from the CVSS vector; privilege transitions are a focused starting point, not evidence of attack. · Rule local-privilege-escalation
Response
- Confirm the source-stated update on affected hosts.Telemetry: DeviceTvmSoftwareVulnerabilities · Host inventory can verify remediation. · Rule local-privilege-escalation
CISA KEV Record
CISA KEV status was not determined for this record.
Change History & Source Data
— No recorded material change
- CNA / source
- 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
- Record status · verification
- UPDATED · NVD API
- CPE
- Unknown
Evidence & Provenance
— No published hunting query names this record. Browse community and library queries instead.