CVE-2026-80587— Linux内核 MPTCP 缓冲区溢出漏洞
一分钟漏洞结论
影响对象
Linux Linux
利用判断
尚无明确在野利用证据，仍需结合暴露面评估
建议动作
优先检查厂商安全公告和参考链接中的修复版本；无法立即升级时，限制受影响服务暴露并加强监测。
以下是该 Linux 内核漏洞描述的中文翻译： 在 Linux 内核中，以下漏洞已得到修复： mptcp：避免组合某些入站子选项 根据 RFC8684，某些 MPTCP 子选项是互斥的；此外，由于代码在多处并未预期某些组合会同时出现，因此需要加以限制。这一点对于可能以不同属性重复出现两次的子选项尤其重要。 新的限制规则与发送端在 中应用的一致。通过一个小修复，我们可以复用相同的规则：当发送方选择该选项时，MP_FASTCLOSE 可以与 DSS 一起使用[1]，但在 Linux 中并非如此。以下是规则说明： 哪些选
可能的 ATT&CK 技术 1 AI
T1213 · Data from Information Repositories
获取后续新漏洞提醒
登录后订阅
一、 漏洞 CVE-2026-80587 基础信息
漏洞信息
对漏洞内容有疑问？看看神龙的深度分析是否有帮助！
查看神龙十问 ↗
尽管我们使用了先进的大模型技术，但其输出仍可能包含不准确或过时的信息。神龙努力确保数据的准确性，但请您根据实际情况进行核实和判断。
Vulnerability Title
mptcp: avoid combining some incoming suboptions
来源: CVE Program / CVE List V5
Vulnerability Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
mptcp: avoid combining some incoming suboptions
Some MPTCP suboptions are mutually exclusive according to the RFC8684,
but also because in different places, the code doesn't expect some
combinations to be present. That's specially true for suboptions that
would be present twice, but with different attributes.
The new restrictions are the same as the ones applied on the output
side, with mptcp_write_options. The same rules can be reused with a
small fix: an MP_FASTCLOSE can be used with a DSS when the sender picks
this option [1], which is not the case on Linux. Here are the rules:
Which options can be used together?
X: mutually exclusive
O: often used together
C: can be used together in some cases
P: could be used together but we prefer not to (optimisations)
| Opt: | MPC | MPJ | DSS | ADD | RM | PRIO | FAIL | FC |
|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| MPC |------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| MPJ | X |------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
| DSS | X | X |------|------|------|------|------|------|
| ADD | X | X | P |------|------|------|------|------|
| RM | C | C | C | P |------|------|------|------|
| PRIO | X | C | C | C | C |------|------|------|
| FAIL | X | X | C | X | X | X |------|------|
| FC | X | X | P | X | X | X | X |------|
| RST | X | X | X | X | X | X | O | O |
|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|
The only difference is with the 'P': another stack could send and
ADD_ADDR with other suboptions (DSS, RM_ADDR), and this should be
allowed.
A few points of attention:
- In theory, an MP_CAPABLE could be used with a RM_ADDR, but there is
no reason to add it with a SYN. Note that even with a 4th ACK, it
doesn't seem to be useful, except when IDs are known in advance via
another channel. Better not to break that.
- Now, combining both an MP_CAPABLE and an MP_JOIN will no longer
result to a reject of the two options, but only the second suboption
is ignored. That seems OK to do that for this unexpected error. At
least now all inconsistent combinations are handled the same way.
This could change later in next. This also means the explicit checks
for having both MPC + MPJ in subflow.c will now be unreachable.
That's fine, they will be removed in a follow-up patch.
- In case of conflicting combinations, the extra suboption(s) is/are
ignored: having such combinations either means the remote peer is
buggy, or is evil. The simplest action is then taken in this case:
stop processing the current suboption.
- In mp_opt->suboptions, there is also a bit reserved to the checksum,
which can be used in an MP_CAPABLE and a DSS. Each time a DSS option
can be used in parallel with another option, the checksum can be set,
so the verification is combined into a new OPTIONS_MPTCP_DSS macro.
- An MP_CAPABLE ACK can carry a Data-Level Length, and an optional
Checksum: they are the same as the ones found in a DSS, because a DSS
cannot be used in parallel to an MP_CAPABLE. Similarly, even if there
is room, a DSS cannot be used with an MP_JOIN.
来源: CVE Program / CVE List V5
CVSS Information
N/A
来源: CVE Program / CVE List V5
Vulnerability Type
N/A
来源: CVE Program / CVE List V5
受影响产品
二、漏洞 CVE-2026-80587 的公开POC
| # | POC 描述 | 源链接 | 神龙链接 |
|---|
AI 生成 POC
高级
未找到公开 POC。
登录以生成 AI POC三、漏洞 CVE-2026-80587 的情报信息
请登录查看更多情报信息。
CVE-2026-80587 补丁与修复 (5)
同批安全公告 · Linux · 2026-08-26 · 共 92 条
| CVE-2026-80557 | libceph 2.0 越界读取漏洞 | |
| CVE-2026-80553 | s390/vfio_ccw 队列取消机制 | |
| CVE-2026-80552 | s390/vfio_ccw 缓冲区溢出漏洞 | |
| CVE-2026-80549 | s390 vfio_ccw 清理逻辑修复 | |
| CVE-2026-80546 | s390 zcrypt CCA CPRB长度溢出检查 | |
| CVE-2026-80547 | s390/vfio_ccw: 实现 CRW 锁 | |
| CVE-2026-80545 | Linux内核 s390 加密子系统缓冲区溢出漏洞 | |
| CVE-2026-80543 | s390/zcrypt: 用零填充 CCA 或 EP11 消息 | |
| CVE-2026-80548 | s390 VFIO 条件变量竞态条件 | |
| CVE-2026-80555 | s390/vfio_ccw 内存释放漏洞 | |
| CVE-2026-80554 | Linux s390/vfio_ccw 通道程序段数限制 | |
| CVE-2026-80556 | Linux内核 atmel-mci驱动释放后使用漏洞 | |
| CVE-2026-80559 | Sur40 输入设备注册顺序修复 | |
| CVE-2026-80558 | Ceph libceph 模块 OSID 索引缺陷 | |
| CVE-2026-80560 | OpenRISC 信号处理 权限位恢复错误 | |
| CVE-2026-80561 | libceph 多个不安全解码远程代码执行漏洞 | |
| CVE-2026-80562 | 内核 gpio ml-ioh 注册表锁机制优化 | |
| CVE-2026-80563 | Linux内核GPIO驱动解绑时释放后使用漏洞 | |
| CVE-2026-80564 | gve 驱动因缺少 ptp adjfine 空指针解引用 | |
| CVE-2026-80565 | Linux Kernel qce 驱动内存管理错误 |
显示前 20 条，共 92 条。 查看全部 → →
IV. Related Vulnerabilities
V. Comments for CVE-2026-80587
暂无评论