CVE-2026-80810

Published Sep 4, 2026

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: io_uring/rsrc: fix folio size overflow in io_vec_fill_bvec() io_vec_fill_bvec() computes the folio size with a plain int 1: unsigned long folio_size = 1 << imu->folio_shift; imu->folio_shift is unsigned int and comes from folio_shift() of the folio backing the registered buffer, so it can be 32 or more on a 64 bit kernel. Shifting int 1 that far is undefined, and on x86 and arm64 the count is taken modulo 32, so a shift of 34 yields 4 rather than 16G. Every other folio_shift shift in this file already uses 1UL. The result is that the segment estimate and the fill loop disagree. io_estimate_bvec_size() sizes the bvec array with the real shift: max_segs += (iov[i].iov_len >> shift) + 2; so a 1M iovec on a 16G folio is charged 2 segments, while io_vec_fill_bvec() then walks the same iovec in folio_size chunks of 4 bytes and writes res_bvec[bvec_idx] a quarter of a million times, past the end of the array it was given. src_bvec is advanced once per iteration as well, so imu->bvec is read past its end at the same time. validate_fixed_range() only checks that the range is inside the registered buffer and does not bound the segment count. Reaching it needs a folio with a shift of at least 32, which means a gigantic hugetlb page: 16G on arm64 with 64K pages, where CONT_PMD_SHIFT is 34 and hugetlb_add_hstate(CONT_PMD_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) registers that size, and likewise on powerpc. x86_64 tops out at 1G, so a shift of 30, which still fits in int and is unaffected. Use 1UL, as the rest of the file does.

Is your site exposed to CVE-2026-80810?

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

EPSS — Exploit Prediction

0.0017
Probability of exploitation
0.06%
Percentile rank

EPSS estimates the probability that this vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. A higher score means more likely to be exploited.

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-80810? +
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: io_uring/rsrc: fix folio size overflow in io_vec_fill_bvec() io_vec_fill_bvec() computes the folio size with a plain int 1: unsigned long folio_size = 1 << imu->folio_shift; imu->folio_shift is unsigned int and comes from folio_shift() of the folio backing the registered buffer, so it can be 32 or more on a 64 bit kernel. Shifting int 1 that far is undefined, and on x86 and arm64 the count is taken modulo 32, so a shift of 34 yields 4 rather than 16G. Every other folio_shift shift in this file already uses 1UL. The result is that the segment estimate and the fill loop disagree. io_estimate_bvec_size() sizes the bvec array with the real shift: max_segs += (iov[i].iov_len >> shift) + 2; so a 1M iovec on a 16G folio is charged 2 segments, while io_vec_fill_bvec() then walks the same iovec in folio_size chunks of 4 bytes and writes res_bvec[bvec_idx] a quarter of a million times, past the end of the array it was given. src_bvec is advanced once per iteration as well, so imu->bvec is read past its end at the same time. validate_fixed_range() only checks that the range is inside the registered buffer and does not bound the segment count. Reaching it needs a folio with a shift of at least 32, which means a gigantic hugetlb page: 16G on arm64 with 64K pages, where CONT_PMD_SHIFT is 34 and hugetlb_add_hstate(CONT_PMD_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) registers that size, and likewise on powerpc. x86_64 tops out at 1G, so a shift of 30, which still fits in int and is unaffected. Use 1UL, as the rest of the file does.
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2026-80810? +
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-2026-80810 — free, no signup required.