<?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>Tue, 29 Sep 2026 07:26:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2026-64031 — erofs: fix managed cache race for unaligned extents</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-64031</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;erofs: fix managed cache race for unaligned extents&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;After unaligned compressed extents were introduced, the following race
could occur:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[Thread 1]                                   [Thread 2]
(z_erofs_fill_bio_vec)
&amp;lt;handle a Z_EROFS_PREALLOCATED_FOLIO folio&amp;gt;
...
filemap_add_folio (1)
                                             (z_erofs_bind_cache)
                                             &amp;lt;the same folio is found..&amp;gt;
                                             ..
                                             ..
folio_attach_private (2)
                                             filemap_add_folio (3) again&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Since (1) is executed but (2) hasn&amp;#39;t been executed yet, it&amp;#39;s possible
that another thread finds the same managed folio in z_erofs_bind_cache()
for a different pcluster and calls filemap_add_folio() again since
folio-&amp;gt;private is still Z_EROFS_PREALLOCATED_FOLIO.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix this by explicitly clearing folio-&amp;gt;private before making the folio
visible in the managed cache so that another pcluster can simply wait
on the locked managed folio as what we did for other shared cases [1].&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This only impacts unaligned data compression (`-E48bit` with zstd,
for example).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[1] Commit 9e2f9d34dd12 (&amp;#34;erofs: handle overlapped pclusters out of
 crafted images properly&amp;#34;) was originally introduced to handle crafted
 overlapped extents, but it addresses unaligned extents as well.&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;erofs: fix managed cache race for unaligned extents&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;After unaligned compressed extents were introduced, the following race
could occur:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[Thread 1]                                   [Thread 2]
(z_erofs_fill_bio_vec)
&amp;lt;handle a Z_EROFS_PREALLOCATED_FOLIO folio&amp;gt;
...
filemap_add_folio (1)
                                             (z_erofs_bind_cache)
                                             &amp;lt;the same folio is found..&amp;gt;
                                             ..
                                             ..
folio_attach_private (2)
                                             filemap_add_folio (3) again&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Since (1) is executed but (2) hasn&amp;#39;t been executed yet, it&amp;#39;s possible
that another thread finds the same managed folio in z_erofs_bind_cache()
for a different pcluster and calls filemap_add_folio() again since
folio-&amp;gt;private is still Z_EROFS_PREALLOCATED_FOLIO.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix this by explicitly clearing folio-&amp;gt;private before making the folio
visible in the managed cache so that another pcluster can simply wait
on the locked managed folio as what we did for other shared cases [1].&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This only impacts unaligned data compression (`-E48bit` with zstd,
for example).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[1] Commit 9e2f9d34dd12 (&amp;#34;erofs: handle overlapped pclusters out of
 crafted images properly&amp;#34;) was originally introduced to handle crafted
 overlapped extents, but it addresses unaligned extents as well.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-64031</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
