<?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>Sun, 04 Oct 2026 14:48:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>BELL-CVE-2026-23157</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bell-cve-2026-23157</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-2026-23157</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>certfr-2026-avi-0316 — De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans les produits VMware. Elles permettent à un attaquant de provoquer…</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/certfr-2026-avi-0316</link>
      <description>certfr-2026-avi-0316</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/certfr-2026-avi-0316</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>EUVD-2026-323483</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-323483</link>
      <description>EUVD-2026-323483</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-323483</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>fkie_cve-2026-23157</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-23157</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;btrfs: do not strictly require dirty metadata threshold for metadata writepages&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[BUG]
There is an internal report that over 1000 processes are
waiting at the io_schedule_timeout() of balance_dirty_pages(), causing
a system hang and trigger a kernel coredump.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The kernel is v6.4 kernel based, but the root problem still applies to
any upstream kernel before v6.18.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[CAUSE]
From Jan Kara for his wisdom on the dirty page balance behavior first.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This cgroup dirty limit was what was actually playing the role here
  because the cgroup had only a small amount of memory and so the dirty
  limit for it was something like 16MB.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Dirty throttling is responsible for enforcing that nobody can dirty
  (significantly) more dirty memory than there&amp;#39;s dirty limit. Thus when
  a task is dirtying pages it periodically enters into balance_dirty_pages()
  and we let it sleep there to slow down the dirtying.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When the system is over dirty limit already (either globally or within
  a cgroup of the running task), we will not let the task exit from
  balance_dirty_pages() until the number of dirty pages drops below the
  limit.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So in this particular case, as I already mentioned, there was a cgroup
  with relatively small amount of memory and as a result with dirty limit
  set at 16MB. A task from that cgroup has dirtied about 28MB worth of
  pages in btrfs btree inode and these were practically the only dirty
  pages in th…&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;btrfs: do not strictly require dirty metadata threshold for metadata writepages&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[BUG]
There is an internal report that over 1000 processes are
waiting at the io_schedule_timeout() of balance_dirty_pages(), causing
a system hang and trigger a kernel coredump.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The kernel is v6.4 kernel based, but the root problem still applies to
any upstream kernel before v6.18.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[CAUSE]
From Jan Kara for his wisdom on the dirty page balance behavior first.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This cgroup dirty limit was what was actually playing the role here
  because the cgroup had only a small amount of memory and so the dirty
  limit for it was something like 16MB.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Dirty throttling is responsible for enforcing that nobody can dirty
  (significantly) more dirty memory than there&amp;#39;s dirty limit. Thus when
  a task is dirtying pages it periodically enters into balance_dirty_pages()
  and we let it sleep there to slow down the dirtying.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When the system is over dirty limit already (either globally or within
  a cgroup of the running task), we will not let the task exit from
  balance_dirty_pages() until the number of dirty pages drops below the
  limit.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So in this particular case, as I already mentioned, there was a cgroup
  with relatively small amount of memory and as a result with dirty limit
  set at 16MB. A task from that cgroup has dirtied about 28MB worth of
  pages in btrfs btree inode and these were practically the only dirty
  pages in th…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-23157</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>GHSA-pw2v-cmfh-x2p3</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-pw2v-cmfh-x2p3</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;btrfs: do not strictly require dirty metadata threshold for metadata writepages&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[BUG]
There is an internal report that over 1000 processes are
waiting at the io_schedule_timeout() of balance_dirty_pages(), causing
a system hang and trigger a kernel coredump.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The kernel is v6.4 kernel based, but the root problem still applies to
any upstream kernel before v6.18.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[CAUSE]
From Jan Kara for his wisdom on the dirty page balance behavior first.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This cgroup dirty limit was what was actually playing the role here
  because the cgroup had only a small amount of memory and so the dirty
  limit for it was something like 16MB.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Dirty throttling is responsible for enforcing that nobody can dirty
  (significantly) more dirty memory than there&amp;#39;s dirty limit. Thus when
  a task is dirtying pages it periodically enters into balance_dirty_pages()
  and we let it sleep there to slow down the dirtying.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When the system is over dirty limit already (either globally or within
  a cgroup of the running task), we will not let the task exit from
  balance_dirty_pages() until the number of dirty pages drops below the
  limit.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So in this particular case, as I already mentioned, there was a cgroup
  with relatively small amount of memory and as a result with dirty limit
  set at 16MB. A task from that cgroup has dirtied about 28MB worth of
  pages in btrfs btree inode and these were practically the only dirty
  pages in th…&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;btrfs: do not strictly require dirty metadata threshold for metadata writepages&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[BUG]
There is an internal report that over 1000 processes are
waiting at the io_schedule_timeout() of balance_dirty_pages(), causing
a system hang and trigger a kernel coredump.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The kernel is v6.4 kernel based, but the root problem still applies to
any upstream kernel before v6.18.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[CAUSE]
From Jan Kara for his wisdom on the dirty page balance behavior first.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This cgroup dirty limit was what was actually playing the role here
  because the cgroup had only a small amount of memory and so the dirty
  limit for it was something like 16MB.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Dirty throttling is responsible for enforcing that nobody can dirty
  (significantly) more dirty memory than there&amp;#39;s dirty limit. Thus when
  a task is dirtying pages it periodically enters into balance_dirty_pages()
  and we let it sleep there to slow down the dirtying.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When the system is over dirty limit already (either globally or within
  a cgroup of the running task), we will not let the task exit from
  balance_dirty_pages() until the number of dirty pages drops below the
  limit.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So in this particular case, as I already mentioned, there was a cgroup
  with relatively small amount of memory and as a result with dirty limit
  set at 16MB. A task from that cgroup has dirtied about 28MB worth of
  pages in btrfs btree inode and these were practically the only dirty
  pages in th…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-pw2v-cmfh-x2p3</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>msrc_CVE-2026-23157 — btrfs: do not strictly require dirty metadata threshold for metadata writepages</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/msrc_cve-2026-23157</link>
      <description>msrc_CVE-2026-23157</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/msrc_cve-2026-23157</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>openSUSE-SU-2026:20416-1 — Security update for the Linux Kernel</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/opensuse-su-2026:20416-1</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/opensuse-su-2026:20416-1</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SUSE-SU-2026:0962-1 — Security update for the Linux Kernel</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/suse-su-2026:0962-1</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-2026:0962-1</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>UBUNTU-CVE-2026-23157</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2026-23157</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux, 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 and 232 more&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: do not strictly require dirty metadata threshold for metadata writepages [BUG] There is an internal report that over 1000 processes are waiting at the io_schedule_timeout() of balance_dirty_pages(), causing a system hang and trigger a kernel coredump. The kernel is v6.4 kernel based, but the root problem still applies to any upstream kernel before v6.18. [CAUSE] From Jan Kara for his wisdom on the dirty page balance behavior first.   This cgroup dirty limit was what was actually playing the role here   because the cgroup had only a small amount of memory and so the dirty   limit for it was something like 16MB.   Dirty throttling is responsible for enforcing that nobody can dirty   (significantly) more dirty memory than there&amp;#39;s dirty limit. Thus when   a task is dirtying pages it periodically enters into balance_dirty_pages()   and we let it sleep there to slow down the dirtying.   When the system is over dirty limit already (either globally or within   a cgroup of the running task), we will not let the task exit from   balance_dirty_pages() until the number of dirty pages drops below the   limit.   So in this particular case, as I already mentioned, there was a cgroup   with relatively small amount of memory and as a result with dirty limit   set at 16MB. A task from that cgroup has dirtied about 28MB worth of   pages in btrfs btree inode and these were practically the only dirty   pages in that cgrou…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux, 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 and 232 more&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: do not strictly require dirty metadata threshold for metadata writepages [BUG] There is an internal report that over 1000 processes are waiting at the io_schedule_timeout() of balance_dirty_pages(), causing a system hang and trigger a kernel coredump. The kernel is v6.4 kernel based, but the root problem still applies to any upstream kernel before v6.18. [CAUSE] From Jan Kara for his wisdom on the dirty page balance behavior first.   This cgroup dirty limit was what was actually playing the role here   because the cgroup had only a small amount of memory and so the dirty   limit for it was something like 16MB.   Dirty throttling is responsible for enforcing that nobody can dirty   (significantly) more dirty memory than there&amp;#39;s dirty limit. Thus when   a task is dirtying pages it periodically enters into balance_dirty_pages()   and we let it sleep there to slow down the dirtying.   When the system is over dirty limit already (either globally or within   a cgroup of the running task), we will not let the task exit from   balance_dirty_pages() until the number of dirty pages drops below the   limit.   So in this particular case, as I already mentioned, there was a cgroup   with relatively small amount of memory and as a result with dirty limit   set at 16MB. A task from that cgroup has dirtied about 28MB worth of   pages in btrfs btree inode and these were practically the only dirty   pages in that cgrou…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2026-23157</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>WID-SEC-W-2026-0421 — Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-0421</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-0421</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
