<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2026 13:10:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>bdu:2025-11975</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bdu:2025-11975</link>
      <description>bdu:2025-11975</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bdu:2025-11975</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>BELL-CVE-2025-21832</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bell-cve-2025-21832</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Alpaquita:23: linux-lts, Alpaquita:25: linux-lts, Alpaquita:stream: linux-lts&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Alpaquita:23: linux-lts, Alpaquita:25: linux-lts, Alpaquita:stream: linux-lts&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bell-cve-2025-21832</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>certfr-2025-avi-0277 — De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans le noyau Linux de Debian LTS. Elles permettent à un attaquant de p…</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/certfr-2025-avi-0277</link>
      <description>certfr-2025-avi-0277</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/certfr-2025-avi-0277</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>EUVD-2026-346684</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-346684</link>
      <description>EUVD-2026-346684</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-346684</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>fkie_cve-2025-21832</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2025-21832</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;block: don&amp;#39;t revert iter for -EIOCBQUEUED&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;blkdev_read_iter() has a few odd checks, like gating the position and
count adjustment on whether or not the result is bigger-than-or-equal to
zero (where bigger than makes more sense), and not checking the return
value of blkdev_direct_IO() before doing an iov_iter_revert(). The
latter can lead to attempting to revert with a negative value, which
when passed to iov_iter_revert() as an unsigned value will lead to
throwing a WARN_ON() because unroll is bigger than MAX_RW_COUNT.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Be sane and don&amp;#39;t revert for -EIOCBQUEUED, like what is done in other
spots.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;block: don&amp;#39;t revert iter for -EIOCBQUEUED&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;blkdev_read_iter() has a few odd checks, like gating the position and
count adjustment on whether or not the result is bigger-than-or-equal to
zero (where bigger than makes more sense), and not checking the return
value of blkdev_direct_IO() before doing an iov_iter_revert(). The
latter can lead to attempting to revert with a negative value, which
when passed to iov_iter_revert() as an unsigned value will lead to
throwing a WARN_ON() because unroll is bigger than MAX_RW_COUNT.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Be sane and don&amp;#39;t revert for -EIOCBQUEUED, like what is done in other
spots.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2025-21832</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>GHSA-cwfx-m26m-rjc8</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-cwfx-m26m-rjc8</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;block: don&amp;#39;t revert iter for -EIOCBQUEUED&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;blkdev_read_iter() has a few odd checks, like gating the position and
count adjustment on whether or not the result is bigger-than-or-equal to
zero (where bigger than makes more sense), and not checking the return
value of blkdev_direct_IO() before doing an iov_iter_revert(). The
latter can lead to attempting to revert with a negative value, which
when passed to iov_iter_revert() as an unsigned value will lead to
throwing a WARN_ON() because unroll is bigger than MAX_RW_COUNT.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Be sane and don&amp;#39;t revert for -EIOCBQUEUED, like what is done in other
spots.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;block: don&amp;#39;t revert iter for -EIOCBQUEUED&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;blkdev_read_iter() has a few odd checks, like gating the position and
count adjustment on whether or not the result is bigger-than-or-equal to
zero (where bigger than makes more sense), and not checking the return
value of blkdev_direct_IO() before doing an iov_iter_revert(). The
latter can lead to attempting to revert with a negative value, which
when passed to iov_iter_revert() as an unsigned value will lead to
throwing a WARN_ON() because unroll is bigger than MAX_RW_COUNT.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Be sane and don&amp;#39;t revert for -EIOCBQUEUED, like what is done in other
spots.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-cwfx-m26m-rjc8</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>OESA-2025-1371 — kernel security update</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/oesa-2025-1371</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; openEuler:24.03-LTS: kernel&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Linux Kernel, the operating system core itself.&#13;
&#13;
Security Fix(es):&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;fs: relax assertions on failure to encode file handles&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Encoding file handles is usually performed by a filesystem &amp;amp;gt;encode_fh()
method that may fail for various reasons.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The legacy users of exportfs_encode_fh(), namely, nfsd and
name_to_handle_at(2) syscall are ready to cope with the possibility
of failure to encode a file handle.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There are a few other users of exportfs_encode_{fh,fid}() that
currently have a WARN_ON() assertion when -&amp;amp;gt;encode_fh() fails.
Relax those assertions because they are wrong.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The second linked bug report states commit 16aac5ad1fa9 (&amp;amp;quot;ovl: support
encoding non-decodable file handles&amp;amp;quot;) in v6.6 as the regressing commit,
but this is not accurate.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The aforementioned commit only increases the chances of the assertion
and allows triggering the assertion with the reproducer using overlayfs,
inotify and drop_caches.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Triggering this assertion was always possible with other filesystems and
other reasons of -&amp;amp;gt;encode_fh() failures and more particularly, it was
also possible with the exact same reproducer using overlayfs that is
mounted with options index=on,nfs_export=on also on kernels &amp;amp;lt; v6.6.
Therefore, I am not listing the aforementioned commit as a Fixes commit.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Backport hint: this patch will have a trivial conflict applying to
v6.6.y, and other trivial conflicts applying to stable kernels &amp;amp;l…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; openEuler:24.03-LTS: kernel&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Linux Kernel, the operating system core itself.&#13;
&#13;
Security Fix(es):&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;fs: relax assertions on failure to encode file handles&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Encoding file handles is usually performed by a filesystem &amp;amp;gt;encode_fh()
method that may fail for various reasons.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The legacy users of exportfs_encode_fh(), namely, nfsd and
name_to_handle_at(2) syscall are ready to cope with the possibility
of failure to encode a file handle.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There are a few other users of exportfs_encode_{fh,fid}() that
currently have a WARN_ON() assertion when -&amp;amp;gt;encode_fh() fails.
Relax those assertions because they are wrong.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The second linked bug report states commit 16aac5ad1fa9 (&amp;amp;quot;ovl: support
encoding non-decodable file handles&amp;amp;quot;) in v6.6 as the regressing commit,
but this is not accurate.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The aforementioned commit only increases the chances of the assertion
and allows triggering the assertion with the reproducer using overlayfs,
inotify and drop_caches.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Triggering this assertion was always possible with other filesystems and
other reasons of -&amp;amp;gt;encode_fh() failures and more particularly, it was
also possible with the exact same reproducer using overlayfs that is
mounted with options index=on,nfs_export=on also on kernels &amp;amp;lt; v6.6.
Therefore, I am not listing the aforementioned commit as a Fixes commit.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Backport hint: this patch will have a trivial conflict applying to
v6.6.y, and other trivial conflicts applying to stable kernels &amp;amp;l…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/oesa-2025-1371</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SUSE-SU-2025:01919-1 — Security update for the Linux Kernel</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/suse-su-2025:01919-1</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Security update for the Linux Kernel&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;Security update for the Linux Kernel&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/suse-su-2025:01919-1</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>UBUNTU-CVE-2025-21832</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2025-21832</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Ubuntu:16.04:LTS: linux-hwe-edge, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.0, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure-edge, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gcp, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gcp-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gke-4.15, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gke-5.4 and 106 more&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: block: don&amp;#39;t revert iter for -EIOCBQUEUED blkdev_read_iter() has a few odd checks, like gating the position and count adjustment on whether or not the result is bigger-than-or-equal to zero (where bigger than makes more sense), and not checking the return value of blkdev_direct_IO() before doing an iov_iter_revert(). The latter can lead to attempting to revert with a negative value, which when passed to iov_iter_revert() as an unsigned value will lead to throwing a WARN_ON() because unroll is bigger than MAX_RW_COUNT. Be sane and don&amp;#39;t revert for -EIOCBQUEUED, like what is done in other spots.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Ubuntu:16.04:LTS: linux-hwe-edge, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.0, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure-edge, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gcp, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gcp-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gke-4.15, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gke-5.4 and 106 more&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: block: don&amp;#39;t revert iter for -EIOCBQUEUED blkdev_read_iter() has a few odd checks, like gating the position and count adjustment on whether or not the result is bigger-than-or-equal to zero (where bigger than makes more sense), and not checking the return value of blkdev_direct_IO() before doing an iov_iter_revert(). The latter can lead to attempting to revert with a negative value, which when passed to iov_iter_revert() as an unsigned value will lead to throwing a WARN_ON() because unroll is bigger than MAX_RW_COUNT. Be sane and don&amp;#39;t revert for -EIOCBQUEUED, like what is done in other spots.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2025-21832</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>WID-SEC-W-2025-0499 — Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2025-0499</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um nicht spezifizierte Auswirkungen zu erzeugen oder einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand zu verursachen.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um nicht spezifizierte Auswirkungen zu erzeugen oder einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand zu verursachen.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2025-0499</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
