In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ntfs: validate non-resident attribute offsets
ntfs_attr_update_meta() shifts the attribute name when converting between
non-sparse and sparse attributes. Converting to sparse also adds the
compressed_size field before the name and mapping pairs, requiring eight
additional bytes in the attribute record.
However, the validator does not check that name_offset is within safe
boundaries for these operations or that the additional space is available.
A malicious MFT record could set name_offset such that:
- The name is positioned at the very end of a non-sparse attribute.
Converting to sparse would shift the name forward by 8 bytes,
writing beyond the attribute boundary.
- The name overlaps with the mapping pairs, causing corruption during
conversion.
Add validation to ensure:
- For named attributes, name_offset is within valid bounds
- Name does not extend beyond the attribute or overlap with mapping pairs
- For non-sparse, non-compressed attributes, eight bytes are available
after mapping_pairs_offset for the compressed_size field
The space check also covers unnamed attributes, for which name_offset = 0
is valid and no name range needs to be checked.
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 (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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.
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