Linux Kernel up to 6.18.33/7.0.10 Page Alloc tag_clear_highpages initialization

CVSS Meta Temp Score
CVSS is a standardized scoring system to determine possibilities of attacks. The Temp Score considers temporal factors like disclosure, exploit and countermeasures. The unique Meta Score calculates the average score of different sources to provide a normalized scoring system.
Current Exploit Price (≈)
Our analysts are monitoring exploit markets and are in contact with vulnerability brokers. The range indicates the observed or calculated exploit price to be seen on exploit markets. A good indicator to understand the monetary effort required for and the popularity of an attack.
CTI Interest Score
Our Cyber Threat Intelligence team is monitoring different web sites, mailing lists, exploit markets and social media networks. The CTI Interest Score identifies the interest of attackers and the security community for this specific vulnerability in real-time. A high score indicates an elevated risk to be targeted for this vulnerability.
9.5$0-$5k0.00

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability classified as very critical has been found in Linux Kernel up to 6.18.33/7.0.10. This issue affects the function tag_clear_highpages of the component Page Alloc. This manipulation causes initialization. This vulnerability is tracked as CVE-2026-64130. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. No exploit exists.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability classified as very critical was found in Linux Kernel up to 6.18.33/7.0.10. Affected by this vulnerability is the function tag_clear_highpages of the component Page Alloc. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a initialization vulnerability. The CWE definition for the vulnerability is CWE-665. The product does not initialize or incorrectly initializes a resource, which might leave the resource in an unexpected state when it is accessed or used. As an impact it is known to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/page_alloc: fix initialization of tags of the huge zero folio with init_on_free __GFP_ZEROTAGS semantics are currently a bit weird, but effectively this flag is only ever set alongside __GFP_ZERO and __GFP_SKIP_KASAN. If we run with init_on_free, we will zero out pages during __free_pages_prepare(), to skip zeroing on the allocation path. However, when allocating with __GFP_ZEROTAG set, post_alloc_hook() will consequently not only skip clearing page content, but also skip clearing tag memory. Not clearing tags through __GFP_ZEROTAGS is irrelevant for most pages that will get mapped to user space through set_pte_at() later: set_pte_at() and friends will detect that the tags have not been initialized yet (PG_mte_tagged not set), and initialize them. However, for the huge zero folio, which will be mapped through a PMD marked as special, this initialization will not be performed, ending up exposing whatever tags were still set for the pages. The docs (Documentation/arch/arm64/memory-tagging-extension.rst) state that allocation tags are set to 0 when a page is first mapped to user space. That no longer holds with the huge zero folio when init_on_free is enabled. Fix it by decoupling __GFP_ZEROTAGS from __GFP_ZERO, passing to tag_clear_highpages() whether we want to also clear page content. Invert the meaning of the tag_clear_highpages() return value to have clearer semantics. Reproduced with the huge zero folio by modifying the check_buffer_fill arm64/mte selftest to use a 2 MiB area, after making sure that pages have a non-0 tag set when freeing (note that, during boot, we will not actually initialize tags, but only set KASAN_TAG_KERNEL in the page flags). $ ./check_buffer_fill 1..20 ... not ok 17 Check initial tags with private mapping, sync error mode and mmap memory not ok 18 Check initial tags with private mapping, sync error mode and mmap/mprotect memory ... This code needs more cleanups; we'll tackle that next, like decoupling __GFP_ZEROTAGS from __GFP_SKIP_KASAN. [[email protected]: s/__GPF_ZERO/__GFP_ZERO/, per David]

The advisory is shared at git.kernel.org. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2026-64130 since 07/19/2026. The exploitation appears to be easy. The attack can be launched remotely. Technical details are known, but no exploit is available. The price for an exploit might be around USD $0-$5k at the moment (estimation calculated on 07/19/2026).

Upgrading to version 6.18.34 or 7.0.11 eliminates this vulnerability.

If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Productinfo

Type

Vendor

Name

Version

License

Website

CPE 2.3info

CPE 2.2info

CVSSv4info

VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CVSSv3info

VulDB Meta Base Score: 9.9
VulDB Meta Temp Score: 9.5

VulDB Base Score: 9.9
VulDB Temp Score: 9.5
VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CVSSv2info

AVACAuCIA
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
VectorComplexityAuthenticationConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

VulDB Base Score: 🔒
VulDB Temp Score: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

Exploitinginfo

Class: Initialization
CWE: CWE-665
CAPEC: 🔒
ATT&CK: 🔒

Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes

Availability: 🔒
Status: Not defined
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔒

0-DayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
TodayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

Threat Intelligenceinfo

Interest: 🔍
Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍

Countermeasuresinfo

Recommended: no mitigation known
Status: 🔍

0-Day Time: 🔒

Upgrade: Kernel 6.18.34/7.0.11

Timelineinfo

07/19/2026 Advisory disclosed
07/19/2026 +0 days CVE reserved
07/19/2026 +0 days VulDB entry created
07/19/2026 +0 days VulDB entry last update

Sourcesinfo

Vendor: kernel.org

Advisory: git.kernel.org
Status: Confirmed

CVE: CVE-2026-64130 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2026-64130
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-380197

Entryinfo

Created: 07/19/2026 18:25
Changes: 07/19/2026 18:25 (55)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103

If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Discussion

No comments yet. Languages: en.

Please log in to comment.

Are you interested in using VulDB?

Download the whitepaper to learn more about our service!