<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2026 07:37:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2026-43067 — ext4: handle wraparound when searching for blocks for indirect mapped blocks</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-43067</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;ext4: handle wraparound when searching for blocks for indirect mapped blocks&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Commit 4865c768b563 (&amp;#34;ext4: always allocate blocks only from groups
inode can use&amp;#34;) restricts what blocks will be allocated for indirect
block based files to block numbers that fit within 32-bit block
numbers.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, when using a review bot running on the latest Gemini LLM to
check this commit when backporting into an LTS based kernel, it raised
this concern:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If ac-&amp;gt;ac_g_ex.fe_group is &amp;gt;= ngroups (for instance, if the goal
   group was populated via stream allocation from s_mb_last_groups),
   then start will be &amp;gt;= ngroups.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Does this allow allocating blocks beyond the 32-bit limit for
   indirect block mapped files? The commit message mentions that
   ext4_mb_scan_groups_linear() takes care to not select unsupported
   groups. However, its loop uses group = *start, and the very first
   iteration will call ext4_mb_scan_group() with this unsupported
   group because next_linear_group() is only called at the end of the
   iteration.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;After reviewing the code paths involved and considering the LLM
review, I determined that this can happen when there is a file system
where some files/directories are extent-mapped and others are
indirect-block mapped.  To address this, add a safety clamp in
ext4_mb_scan_groups().&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;ext4: handle wraparound when searching for blocks for indirect mapped blocks&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Commit 4865c768b563 (&amp;#34;ext4: always allocate blocks only from groups
inode can use&amp;#34;) restricts what blocks will be allocated for indirect
block based files to block numbers that fit within 32-bit block
numbers.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, when using a review bot running on the latest Gemini LLM to
check this commit when backporting into an LTS based kernel, it raised
this concern:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If ac-&amp;gt;ac_g_ex.fe_group is &amp;gt;= ngroups (for instance, if the goal
   group was populated via stream allocation from s_mb_last_groups),
   then start will be &amp;gt;= ngroups.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Does this allow allocating blocks beyond the 32-bit limit for
   indirect block mapped files? The commit message mentions that
   ext4_mb_scan_groups_linear() takes care to not select unsupported
   groups. However, its loop uses group = *start, and the very first
   iteration will call ext4_mb_scan_group() with this unsupported
   group because next_linear_group() is only called at the end of the
   iteration.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;After reviewing the code paths involved and considering the LLM
review, I determined that this can happen when there is a file system
where some files/directories are extent-mapped and others are
indirect-block mapped.  To address this, add a safety clamp in
ext4_mb_scan_groups().&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-43067</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
