In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ocfs2: validate fast symlink target during inode read ocfs2_validate_inode_block() already rejects several inconsistent self-contained dinodes before they are exposed to the rest of the filesystem
Why It Matters
Analysis dossierWhy It Matters
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ocfs2: validate fast symlink target during inode read ocfs2_validate_inode_block() already rejects several inconsistent self-contained dinodes before they are exposed to the rest of the filesystem. Fast symlinks need the same treatment. A zero-cluster symlink is treated as a fast symlink and later read through page_get_link() and ocfs2_fast_symlink_read_folio(). That path uses strnlen() on the inline payload and then copies len + 1 bytes into the folio. If a corrupt dinode stores an i_size that does not fit the inline area or omits the terminating NUL at i_size, that copy reads past the end of the inode block buffer. Reject zero-cluster symlink dinodes whose i_size exceeds the inline fast-symlink capacity or whose inline payload is not NUL-terminated exactly at i_size when the inode block is validated. This keeps malformed fast symlinks from reaching the read path. Validation reproduced this kernel report: KASAN use-after-free in ocfs2_fast_symlink_read_folio+0x12c/0x1f0 RIP: 0033:0x7f5c6d859aa7 Read of size 3905 Call trace: dump_stack_lvl+0x66/0xa0 (?:?) print_report+0xce/0x630 (?:?) ocfs2_fast_symlink_read_folio+0x12c/0x1f0 (fs/ocfs2/inode.c:?) srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 (?:?) __virt_addr_valid+0x19f/0x330 (?:?) kasan_report+0xe0/0x110 (?:?) kasan_check_range+0x105/0x1b0 (?:?) __asan_memcpy+0x23/0x60 (?:?) filemap_read_folio+0x27/0xe0 (?:?) filemap_read_folio+0x35/0xe0 (?:?) do_read_cache_folio+0x138/0x230 (?:?) __page_get_link+0x26/0x110 (?:?) page_get_link+0x2e/0x70 (?:?) vfs_readlink+0x15e/0x250 (?:?) touch_atime+0x4d/0x370 (?:?) do_readlinkat+0x186/0x200 (?:?) do_user_addr_fault+0x65a/0x890 (?:?) __x64_sys_readlink+0x46/0x60 (?:?) do_syscall_64+0x115/0x6a0 (arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:87) entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f (?:?)
High Severity / Review
Unknown
Unknown
Risk basis: SOC ecosystem technology relevance; CRITICAL severity; Critical CVSS without confirmed KEV exploitation
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 network-unauthenticated (CVSS AV:N, CVSS PR:N, CVSS UI:N)
Exposure
- Identify devices reporting this CVE and note which expose the affected service to untrusted networks.Telemetry: DeviceTvmSoftwareVulnerabilities · A network-reachable, no-privilege vector makes internet-facing instances the first exposure question. · Rule network-unauthenticated
Exploitation evidence
- Review inbound connections to the affected service from unexpected sources since the advisory date.Telemetry: DeviceNetworkEvents · Hunting hypothesis from the CVSS vector; it does not show that exploitation occurred. · Rule network-unauthenticated
Response
- Confirm the source-stated update is installed and the CVE is no longer reported.Telemetry: DeviceTvmSoftwareVulnerabilities · A follow-up inventory check verifies remediation. · Rule network-unauthenticated
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