In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: md: do overflow check for sb->bblog_shift in super_1_load() In super_1_load(), sb->bblog_shift is an __u8 type value loaded from on- disk superblock
Why It Matters
Analysis dossierWhy It Matters
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: md: do overflow check for sb->bblog_shift in super_1_load() In super_1_load(), sb->bblog_shift is an __u8 type value loaded from on- disk superblock. It is used for badblocks API badblocks_set() by the following sequence, 1930 rdev->badblocks.shift = sb->bblog_shift; 1931 for (i = 0 ; i < (sectors << (9-3)) ; i++, bbp++) { 1932 u64 bb = le64_to_cpu(*bbp); 1933 int count = bb & (0x3ff); 1934 u64 sector = bb >> 10; 1935 sector <<= sb->bblog_shift; 1936 count <<= sb->bblog_shift; 1937 if (bb + 1 == 0) 1938 break; 1939 if (!badblocks_set(&rdev->badblocks, sector, count, 1)) 1940 return -EINVAL; 1941 } bb->bblog_shit is in range of 0-255, variable sector is 64bit width, for an invalid bb->bblog_shit, it is possible to make sector be overflowed by the following calculation, 1935 sector <<= sb->bblog_shift; Then in turn when call badblocks_set() at line 1939 with the invalid rdev->badblocks.shift set at line 1930, may result an overflow inside _badblocks_clear() in block/badblocks.c. Although there are many places to call badblocks APIs, the non-zero shift value is only used in super_1_load(), other places always use 0 as the shift value. Therefore it is unnecessary to do a general shift value overflow check inside badblock API, and just check here as the caller. This may avoid unnecessary check, make the badblocks API code more simple and elegant.
High
Unknown
Unknown
Risk basis: SOC ecosystem technology relevance; HIGH severity; No confirmed exploitation signal in current enrichment
Affected Products & Remediation
0 source-backed productsVendor or catalog guidance (source)
Not provided by source
Known exploitation (source facts)
Only what a source states. Unknown means no source has said either way; it is not "not exploited".
- CISA KEV
- Unknown
- Exploited (source statement)
- Unknown
- Publicly disclosed (source)
- Unknown
Suggested hunting (rule-based inference)
SecOps Signal recommendation (rule-based inference). These steps are hunting hypotheses from the vulnerability class; they do not state or imply that exploitation occurred here or anywhere.
Matched local-privilege-escalation (CVSS AV:L, CVSS PR:L)
Exposure
- Identify hosts reporting this CVE, prioritising shared or multi-user systems.Telemetry: DeviceTvmSoftwareVulnerabilities · A local, low-privilege vector matters most where untrusted users can run code. · Rule local-privilege-escalation
Exploitation evidence
- Look for low-privileged processes spawning SYSTEM or root-level child processes on affected hosts.Telemetry: DeviceProcessEvents · Hunting hypothesis from the CVSS vector; privilege transitions are a focused starting point, not evidence of attack. · Rule local-privilege-escalation
Response
- Confirm the source-stated update on affected hosts.Telemetry: DeviceTvmSoftwareVulnerabilities · Host inventory can verify remediation. · Rule local-privilege-escalation
CISA KEV Record
CISA KEV status was not determined for this record.
Change History & Source Data
— No recorded material change
- CNA / source
- 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
- Record status · verification
- UPDATED · NVD API
- CPE
- Unknown
Evidence & Provenance
— No published hunting query names this record. Browse community and library queries instead.
Correlated briefings
— No published briefing references this CVE