# CVE-2022-49093: skbuff: fix coalescing for page_pool fragment recycling

> A use-after-free vulnerability in the Linux kernel's skbuff coalescing logic allows attackers to potentially execute arbitrary code or escalate privileges.

- **Severity:** Critical 9.8 (`CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H`)
- **Exploited in the wild:** Not known
- **Login needed:** Not needed
- **Attackable:** Over the internet
- **Victim action needed:** Not needed
- **Fix available:** Yes
- **Published:** 26 Feb 2025
- **Updated:** 5 Aug 2026
- **Also known as:** DEBIAN-CVE-2022-49093, GHSA-3j29-8r33-hfrc, UBUNTU-CVE-2022-49093

## What is CVE-2022-49093?

CVE-2022-49093 is a critical use after free vulnerability in Linux kernel, published on 26 Feb 2025. An attacker can exploit it over the internet without logging in, with no action from the victim.

### Official description

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

skbuff: fix coalescing for page_pool fragment recycling

Fix a use-after-free when using page_pool with page fragments. We
encountered this problem during normal RX in the hns3 driver:

(1) Initially we have three descriptors in the RX queue. The first one
    allocates PAGE1 through page_pool, and the other two allocate one
    half of PAGE2 each. Page references look like this:

                RX_BD1 _______ PAGE1
                RX_BD2 _______ PAGE2
                RX_BD3 _________/

(2) Handle RX on the first descriptor. Allocate SKB1, eventually added
    to the receive queue by tcp_queue_rcv().

(3) Handle RX on the second descriptor. Allocate SKB2 and pass it to
    netif_receive_skb():

    netif_receive_skb(SKB2)
      ip_rcv(SKB2)
        SKB3 = skb_clone(SKB2)

    SKB2 and SKB3 share a reference to PAGE2 through
    skb_shinfo()->dataref. The other ref to PAGE2 is still held by
    RX_BD3:

                      SKB2 ---+- PAGE2
                      SKB3 __/   /
                RX_BD3 _________/

 (3b) Now while handling TCP, coalesce SKB3 with SKB1:

      tcp_v4_rcv(SKB3)
        tcp_try_coalesce(to=SKB1, from=SKB3)    // succeeds
        kfree_skb_partial(SKB3)
          skb_release_data(SKB3)                // drops one dataref

                      SKB1 _____ PAGE1
                           \____
                      SKB2 _____ PAGE2
                                 /
                RX_BD3 _________/

    In skb_try_coalesce(), __skb_frag_ref() takes a page reference to
    PAGE2, where it should instead have increased the page_pool frag
    reference, pp_frag_count. Without coalescing, when releasing both
    SKB2 and SKB3, a single reference to PAGE2 would be dropped. Now
    when releasing SKB1 and SKB2, two references to PAGE2 will be
    dropped, resulting in underflow.

 (3c) Drop SKB2:

      af_packet_rcv(SKB2)
        consume_skb(SKB2)
          skb_release_data(SKB2)                // drops second dataref
            page_pool_return_skb_page(PAGE2)    // drops one pp_frag_count

                      SKB1 _____ PAGE1
                           \____
                                 PAGE2
                                 /
                RX_BD3 _________/

(4) Userspace calls recvmsg()
    Copies SKB1 and releases it. Since SKB3 was coalesced with SKB1, we
    release the SKB3 page as well:

    tcp_eat_recv_skb(SKB1)
      skb_release_data(SKB1)
        page_pool_return_skb_page(PAGE1)
        page_pool_return_skb_page(PAGE2)        // drops second pp_frag_count

(5) PAGE2 is freed, but the third RX descriptor was still using it!
    In our case this causes IOMMU faults, but it would silently corrupt
    memory if the IOMMU was disabled.

Change the logic that checks whether pp_recycle SKBs can be coalesced.
We still reject differing pp_recycle between 'from' and 'to' SKBs, but
in order to avoid the situation described above, we also reject
coalescing when both 'from' and 'to' are pp_recycled and 'from' is
cloned.

The new logic allows coalescing a cloned pp_recycle SKB into a page
refcounted one, because in this case the release (4) will drop the right
reference, the one taken by skb_try_coalesce().

Weakness: CWE-416 (Use After Free)

## Which versions are affected by CVE-2022-49093?

It affects 1 product.


Products: Linux kernel.

## How do I fix CVE-2022-49093?

Apply the vendor's patch.

## Is CVE-2022-49093 being exploited?

There is no known exploitation of CVE-2022-49093 in the wild and no public exploit code.

## Other vulnerabilities in Linux kernel

- [CVE-2026-53266](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-53266/): Linux Kernel Out-of-Bounds Write (high 8.8, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2013-6282](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2013-6282/): Linux Kernel Improper Input Validation (high 8.8, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2022-0185](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2022-0185/): Linux Kernel Heap-Based Buffer Overflow (high 8.4, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2013-2094](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2013-2094/): Linux Kernel Privilege Escalation (high 8.4, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2026-53362](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-53362/): Linux Kernel Unspecified (high 7.8, exploited in the wild)

## Fix prompt for AI coding agents

```text
Check this codebase for CVE-2022-49093 and fix it if it is affected.

What it is: CVE-2022-49093 is a critical use after free vulnerability in Linux kernel, published on 26 Feb 2025. An attacker can exploit it over the internet without logging in, with no action from the victim.
Exploitation: There is no known exploitation of CVE-2022-49093 in the wild and no public exploit code.

Affected product: Linux kernel. No package-level version data is available, so check the vendor advisory linked from the reference page.

Task:
1. Search the dependency manifests and lockfiles (for example package.json, package-lock.json, requirements.txt, poetry.lock, uv.lock, pom.xml, build.gradle, go.mod, Cargo.lock, Gemfile.lock) and any Dockerfiles for the affected packages, including transitive dependencies.
2. If an affected version is in use, upgrade it to the fixed version for its release line with the project's package manager, so the lockfile is regenerated. Prefer the smallest upgrade that fixes it.
3. If there is no fix, or the upgrade would break the build, do not guess: explain the risk and the safest workaround instead.
4. Run the tests and summarise what changed and why.
5. If nothing in the project is affected, say so and change nothing.

Reference: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2022-49093/ (Markdown: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2022-49093/index.md)
```

## Sources

- CVE record: https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2022-49093
- NVD: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-49093
- OSV: https://osv.dev/vulnerability/CVE-2022-49093

---
From sbomify Insights: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2022-49093/
Summaries are generated and may contain mistakes; the official description above is the record.
