Most recent entries from all

bdu:2026-11506

BELL-CVE-2025-71183

Affected: Alpaquita:23: linux-lts, Alpaquita:25: linux-lts, Alpaquita:stream: linux-lts

certfr-2026-avi-0166 — De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans le noyau Linux de Debian. Elles permettent à un attaquant de provo…

certfr-2026-avi-0166

EUVD-2026-347562

fkie_cve-2025-71183

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

btrfs: always detect conflicting inodes when logging inode refs

After rename exchanging (either with the rename exchange operation or regular renames in multiple non-atomic steps) two inodes and at least one of them is a directory, we can end up with a log tree that contains only of the inodes and after a power failure that can result in an attempt to delete the other inode when it should not because it was not deleted before the power failure. In some case that delete attempt fails when the target inode is a directory that contains a subvolume inside it, since the log replay code is not prepared to deal with directory entries that point to root items (only inode items).

1) We have directories "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B) under the same parent directory;

2) We have a file (inode C) under directory "dir1" (inode A);

3) We have a subvolume inside directory "dir2" (inode B);

4) All these inodes were persisted in a past transaction and we are currently at transaction N;

5) We rename the file (inode C), so at btrfs_log_new_name() we update inode C's last_unlink_trans to N;

6) We get a rename exchange for "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B), so after the exchange "dir1" is inode B and "dir2" is inode A. During the rename exchange we call btrfs_log_new_name() for inodes A and B, but because they are directories, we don't update their last_unlink_trans to N;

7) An fsync again…

GHSA-jrg6-qwp6-f549

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

btrfs: always detect conflicting inodes when logging inode refs

1) We have directories "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B) under the same parent directory;

2) We have a file (inode C) under directory "dir1" (inode A);

3) We have a subvolume inside directory "dir2" (inode B);

4) All these inodes were persisted in a past transaction and we are currently at transaction N;

5) We rename the file (inode C), so at btrfs_log_new_name() we update inode C's last_unlink_trans to N;

7) An fsync again…

msrc_CVE-2025-71183 — btrfs: always detect conflicting inodes when logging inode refs

msrc_CVE-2025-71183

openSUSE-SU-2026:20416-1 — Security update for the Linux Kernel

Security update for the Linux Kernel

SUSE-SU-2026:1078-1 — Security update for the Linux Kernel

Security update for the Linux Kernel

UBUNTU-CVE-2025-71183

Affected: Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux-aws, Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux-azure, Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux-lts-xenial, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-aws, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-aws-hwe, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-azure, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-gcp, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-hwe, Ubuntu:16.04:LTS: linux-hwe-edge and 231 more

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: always detect conflicting inodes when logging inode refs After rename exchanging (either with the rename exchange operation or regular renames in multiple non-atomic steps) two inodes and at least one of them is a directory, we can end up with a log tree that contains only of the inodes and after a power failure that can result in an attempt to delete the other inode when it should not because it was not deleted before the power failure. In some case that delete attempt fails when the target inode is a directory that contains a subvolume inside it, since the log replay code is not prepared to deal with directory entries that point to root items (only inode items). 1) We have directories "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B) under the same parent directory; 2) We have a file (inode C) under directory "dir1" (inode A); 3) We have a subvolume inside directory "dir2" (inode B); 4) All these inodes were persisted in a past transaction and we are currently at transaction N; 5) We rename the file (inode C), so at btrfs_log_new_name() we update inode C's last_unlink_trans to N; 6) We get a rename exchange for "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B), so after the exchange "dir1" is inode B and "dir2" is inode A. During the rename exchange we call btrfs_log_new_name() for inodes A and B, but because they are directories, we don't update their last_unlink_trans to N; 7) An fsync against the fi…

WID-SEC-W-2026-0280 — Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux-Kernel ausnutzen, um nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen, die möglicherweise zu einer Denial-of-Service- Bedingung führen oder eine Speicherbeschädigung verursachen können.