CVE-2026-31590

About vulnerability

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

KVM: SEV: Drop WARN on large size for KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_REG_REGION

Drop the WARN in sev_pin_memory() on npages overflowing an int, as the WARN is comically trivially to trigger from userspace, e.g. by doing:

struct kvm_enc_region range = { .addr = 0, .size = -1ul, };

__vm_ioctl(vm, KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_REG_REGION, &range);

Note, the checks in sev_mem_enc_register_region() that presumably exist to verify the incoming address+size are completely worthless, as both “addr” and “size” are u64s and SEV is 64-bit only, i.e. they can’t be greater than ULONG_MAX. That wart will be cleaned up in the near future.

if (range->addr > ULONG_MAX || range->size > ULONG_MAX) return -EINVAL;

Opportunistically add a comment to explain why the code calculates the number of pages the “hard” way, e.g. instead of just shifting @ulen.

Affected product:

AlmaLinux 9.2 ESU , TuxCare 9.6 ESU

Affected packages:

kernel @ 5.14.0 (+1 more)

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

KVM: SEV: Drop WARN on large size for KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_REG_REGION

Drop the WARN in sev_pin_memory() on npages overflowing an int, as the WARN is comically trivially to trigger from userspace, e.g. by doing:

struct kvm_enc_region range = { .addr = 0, .size = -1ul, };

__vm_ioctl(vm, KVM_MEMORY_ENCRYPT_REG_REGION, &range);

Note, the checks in sev_mem_enc_register_region() that presumably exist to verify the incoming address+size are completely worthless, as both “addr” and “size” are u64s and SEV is 64-bit only, i.e. they can’t be greater than ULONG_MAX. That wart will be cleaned up in the near future.

if (range->addr > ULONG_MAX || range->size > ULONG_MAX) return -EINVAL;

Opportunistically add a comment to explain why the code calculates the number of pages the “hard” way, e.g. instead of just shifting @ulen.