CVE-2026-63875

Published Jul 19, 2026

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: arm64: tlb: Flush walk cache when unsharing PMD tables When huge_pmd_unshare() is called to unshare a PMD table, the tlb_unshare_pmd_ptdesc() function sets tlb->unshared_tables=true but the aarch64 tlb_flush() only checked tlb->freed_tables to determine whether to use TLBF_NONE (vae1is, invalidates walk cache) or TLBF_NOWALKCACHE (vale1is, leaf-only). This caused the stale PMD page table entry to remain in the walk cache after unshare, potentially leading to incorrect page table walks. Fix by including unshared_tables in the check, so that when unsharing tables, TLBF_NONE is used and the walk cache is properly invalidated. Here is the detailed distinction between vae1is and vale1is: | Instruction Combination | Actual Invalidation Scope | | ------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------| | `VAE1IS` + TTL=`0` | All entries at all levels (full invalidation) | | `VAE1IS` + TTL=`2` (L2) | Non-leaf at Level 0/1 + leaf at Level 2 | | `VALE1IS` + TTL=`0` | Leaf entries at all levels (non-leaf not cleared) | | `VALE1IS` + TTL=`2` (L2) | Leaf entry at Level 2 only |

Is your site exposed to CVE-2026-63875?

Run a free security scan — no signup, results in seconds.

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-63875? +
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: arm64: tlb: Flush walk cache when unsharing PMD tables When huge_pmd_unshare() is called to unshare a PMD table, the tlb_unshare_pmd_ptdesc() function sets tlb->unshared_tables=true but the aarch64 tlb_flush() only checked tlb->freed_tables to determine whether to use TLBF_NONE (vae1is, invalidates walk cache) or TLBF_NOWALKCACHE (vale1is, leaf-only). This caused the stale PMD page table entry to remain in the walk cache after unshare, potentially leading to incorrect page table walks. Fix by including unshared_tables in the check, so that when unsharing tables, TLBF_NONE is used and the walk cache is properly invalidated. Here is the detailed distinction between vae1is and vale1is: | Instruction Combination | Actual Invalidation Scope | | ------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------| | `VAE1IS` + TTL=`0` | All entries at all levels (full invalidation) | | `VAE1IS` + TTL=`2` (L2) | Non-leaf at Level 0/1 + leaf at Level 2 | | `VALE1IS` + TTL=`0` | Leaf entries at all levels (non-leaf not cleared) | | `VALE1IS` + TTL=`2` (L2) | Leaf entry at Level 2 only |
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2026-63875? +
You can use Secably's free Website Scanner to check your website for known vulnerabilities. For infrastructure scanning, use the Port Scanner to identify exposed services that may be affected. Check the vendor advisories linked above for specific patch and version information.

Don't wait for an exploit

Scan your website for vulnerabilities like CVE-2026-63875 — free, no signup required.