In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
btrfs: avoid potential out-of-bounds in btrfs_encode_fh()
The function btrfs_encode_fh() does not properly account for the three
cases it handles.
Before writing to the file handle (fh), the function only returns to the
user BTRFS_FID_SIZE_NON_CONNECTABLE (5 dwords, 20 bytes) or
BTRFS_FID_SIZE_CONNECTABLE (8 dwords, 32 bytes).
However, when a parent exists and the root ID of the parent and the
inode are different, the function writes BTRFS_FID_SIZE_CONNECTABLE_ROOT
(10 dwords, 40 bytes).
If *max_len is not large enough, this write goes out of bounds because
BTRFS_FID_SIZE_CONNECTABLE_ROOT is greater than
BTRFS_FID_SIZE_CONNECTABLE originally returned.
This results in an 8-byte out-of-bounds write at
fid->parent_root_objectid = parent_root_id.
A previous attempt to fix this issue was made but was lost.
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
Although this issue does not seem to be easily triggerable, it is a
potential memory corruption bug that should be fixed. This patch
resolves the issue by ensuring the function returns the appropriate size
for all three cases and validates that *max_len is large enough before
writing any data.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.8 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it