In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ntfs: bound the attribute-list entry in ntfs_read_inode_mount()
The $MFT attribute-list walk in ntfs_read_inode_mount() validates each
entry only with "(u8 *)al_entry + 6 > al_end" and
"(u8 *)al_entry + le16_to_cpu(al_entry->length) > al_end", but then reads
al_entry->lowest_vcn (an __le64 at offset 8) and al_entry->mft_reference
(offset 16) -- fields beyond the 6 bytes proven in range. al_entry->length
is attacker-controlled and only required non-zero, so a short entry (e.g.
length 8) placed at the tail passes both checks while the lowest_vcn /
mft_reference reads fall past al_end.
al_end is ni->attr_list + attr_list_size (the on-disk size); the buffer is
kvzalloc(round_up(attr_list_size, SECTOR_SIZE)), so the sector rounding
usually absorbs the over-read -- but when attr_list_size is a multiple of
SECTOR_SIZE there is no slack and a crafted $MFT attribute list produces an
out-of-bounds read at mount time.
Validate the entry with ntfs_attr_list_entry_is_valid() (added in patch
1/3) before dereferencing it, matching the bound the other attribute-list
walks now use. The validator already requires the length to cover the fixed
header, which makes the separate "!al_entry->length" check redundant, so
drop it too.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
- EG Severity
- Not assessed: no CVSS publishedA missing CVSS is not a severity of zero.
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). 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
- No SSVC decision: EchelonGraph has not assessed this CVECISA 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: the BOD 26-04 block below.
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.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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