<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-09-29T10:47:53.399295+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@circl.lu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-89718</id>
    <title>CVE-2026-89718 — zram: fix out-of-bounds access in writeback_store()</title>
    <updated>2026-09-29T10:47:53.506475+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> Linux</p>
<p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p>
<p>zram: fix out-of-bounds access in writeback_store()</p>
<p>Patch series "zram: fix stale scan bounds after reinitialization".</p>
<p>Both writeback_store() and read_block_state() derive their table scan
bounds from zram-&gt;disksize before acquiring dev_lock.  If the device is
reset and reinitialized with a smaller disksize between that read and lock
acquisition, the bound can describe the old table while the scan operates
on the new one.  This can lead to out-of-bounds slot accesses.</p>
<p>Move both bound calculations under dev_lock so each bound remains
consistent with the table throughout its scan.  Keep the fixes separate
because the affected interfaces originate from different commits and can
be backported independently.</p>
<p>This patch (of 2):</p>
<p>writeback_store() calculates the table scan bounds before taking dev_lock.
A reset followed by reconfiguration with a smaller disksize can therefore
replace zram-&gt;table while writeback_store() is waiting for the lock.  Once
it acquires the lock, it sees an initialized device but scans the new
table using the old upper bound, resulting in an out-of-bounds access.</p>
<p>Calculate the number of pages while holding dev_lock so the scan bound
matches the table protected by the lock.</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-89718"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
