<?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 07:10:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>BELL-CVE-2026-64059</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bell-cve-2026-64059</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; 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:25: linux-lts, Alpaquita:stream: linux-lts&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bell-cve-2026-64059</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>certfr-2026-avi-0926 — De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu. Certaines d'entre elles permettent à un a…</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/certfr-2026-avi-0926</link>
      <description>certfr-2026-avi-0926</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/certfr-2026-avi-0926</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>EUVD-2026-338736</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-338736</link>
      <description>EUVD-2026-338736</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-338736</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>fkie_cve-2026-64059</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-64059</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;netfs: Fix folio-&amp;gt;private handling in netfs_perform_write()&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Under some circumstances, netfs_perform_write() doesn&amp;#39;t correctly
manipulate folio-&amp;gt;private between NULL, NETFS_FOLIO_COPY_TO_CACHE, pointing
to a group and pointing to a netfs_folio struct, leading to potential
multiple attachments of private data with associated folio ref leaks and
also leaks of netfs_folio structs or netfs_group refs.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix this by consolidating the place at which a folio is marked uptodate in
one place and having that look at what&amp;#39;s attached to folio-&amp;gt;private and
decide how to clean it up and then set the new group.  Also, the content
shouldn&amp;#39;t be flushed if group is NULL, even if a group is specified in the
netfs_group parameter, as that would be the case for a new folio.  A
filesystem should always specify netfs_group or never specify netfs_group.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Sashiko auto-review tool noted that it was theoretically possible that
the fpos &amp;gt;= ctx-&amp;gt;zero_point section might leak if it modified a streaming
write folio.  This is unlikely, but with a network filesystem, third party
changes can happen.  It also pointed out that __netfs_set_group() would
leak if called multiple times on the same folio from the &amp;#34;whole folio
modify section&amp;#34;.&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;netfs: Fix folio-&amp;gt;private handling in netfs_perform_write()&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Under some circumstances, netfs_perform_write() doesn&amp;#39;t correctly
manipulate folio-&amp;gt;private between NULL, NETFS_FOLIO_COPY_TO_CACHE, pointing
to a group and pointing to a netfs_folio struct, leading to potential
multiple attachments of private data with associated folio ref leaks and
also leaks of netfs_folio structs or netfs_group refs.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix this by consolidating the place at which a folio is marked uptodate in
one place and having that look at what&amp;#39;s attached to folio-&amp;gt;private and
decide how to clean it up and then set the new group.  Also, the content
shouldn&amp;#39;t be flushed if group is NULL, even if a group is specified in the
netfs_group parameter, as that would be the case for a new folio.  A
filesystem should always specify netfs_group or never specify netfs_group.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Sashiko auto-review tool noted that it was theoretically possible that
the fpos &amp;gt;= ctx-&amp;gt;zero_point section might leak if it modified a streaming
write folio.  This is unlikely, but with a network filesystem, third party
changes can happen.  It also pointed out that __netfs_set_group() would
leak if called multiple times on the same folio from the &amp;#34;whole folio
modify section&amp;#34;.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-64059</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>GHSA-3rfc-7v55-gmrf</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-3rfc-7v55-gmrf</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;netfs: Fix folio-&amp;gt;private handling in netfs_perform_write()&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Under some circumstances, netfs_perform_write() doesn&amp;#39;t correctly
manipulate folio-&amp;gt;private between NULL, NETFS_FOLIO_COPY_TO_CACHE, pointing
to a group and pointing to a netfs_folio struct, leading to potential
multiple attachments of private data with associated folio ref leaks and
also leaks of netfs_folio structs or netfs_group refs.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix this by consolidating the place at which a folio is marked uptodate in
one place and having that look at what&amp;#39;s attached to folio-&amp;gt;private and
decide how to clean it up and then set the new group.  Also, the content
shouldn&amp;#39;t be flushed if group is NULL, even if a group is specified in the
netfs_group parameter, as that would be the case for a new folio.  A
filesystem should always specify netfs_group or never specify netfs_group.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Sashiko auto-review tool noted that it was theoretically possible that
the fpos &amp;gt;= ctx-&amp;gt;zero_point section might leak if it modified a streaming
write folio.  This is unlikely, but with a network filesystem, third party
changes can happen.  It also pointed out that __netfs_set_group() would
leak if called multiple times on the same folio from the &amp;#34;whole folio
modify section&amp;#34;.&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;netfs: Fix folio-&amp;gt;private handling in netfs_perform_write()&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Under some circumstances, netfs_perform_write() doesn&amp;#39;t correctly
manipulate folio-&amp;gt;private between NULL, NETFS_FOLIO_COPY_TO_CACHE, pointing
to a group and pointing to a netfs_folio struct, leading to potential
multiple attachments of private data with associated folio ref leaks and
also leaks of netfs_folio structs or netfs_group refs.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix this by consolidating the place at which a folio is marked uptodate in
one place and having that look at what&amp;#39;s attached to folio-&amp;gt;private and
decide how to clean it up and then set the new group.  Also, the content
shouldn&amp;#39;t be flushed if group is NULL, even if a group is specified in the
netfs_group parameter, as that would be the case for a new folio.  A
filesystem should always specify netfs_group or never specify netfs_group.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Sashiko auto-review tool noted that it was theoretically possible that
the fpos &amp;gt;= ctx-&amp;gt;zero_point section might leak if it modified a streaming
write folio.  This is unlikely, but with a network filesystem, third party
changes can happen.  It also pointed out that __netfs_set_group() would
leak if called multiple times on the same folio from the &amp;#34;whole folio
modify section&amp;#34;.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-3rfc-7v55-gmrf</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>UBUNTU-CVE-2026-64059</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2026-64059</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 118 more&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfs: Fix folio-&amp;gt;private handling in netfs_perform_write() Under some circumstances, netfs_perform_write() doesn&amp;#39;t correctly manipulate folio-&amp;gt;private between NULL, NETFS_FOLIO_COPY_TO_CACHE, pointing to a group and pointing to a netfs_folio struct, leading to potential multiple attachments of private data with associated folio ref leaks and also leaks of netfs_folio structs or netfs_group refs. Fix this by consolidating the place at which a folio is marked uptodate in one place and having that look at what&amp;#39;s attached to folio-&amp;gt;private and decide how to clean it up and then set the new group.  Also, the content shouldn&amp;#39;t be flushed if group is NULL, even if a group is specified in the netfs_group parameter, as that would be the case for a new folio.  A filesystem should always specify netfs_group or never specify netfs_group. The Sashiko auto-review tool noted that it was theoretically possible that the fpos &amp;gt;= ctx-&amp;gt;zero_point section might leak if it modified a streaming write folio.  This is unlikely, but with a network filesystem, third party changes can happen.  It also pointed out that __netfs_set_group() would leak if called multiple times on the same folio from the &amp;#34;whole folio modify section&amp;#34;.&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 118 more&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfs: Fix folio-&amp;gt;private handling in netfs_perform_write() Under some circumstances, netfs_perform_write() doesn&amp;#39;t correctly manipulate folio-&amp;gt;private between NULL, NETFS_FOLIO_COPY_TO_CACHE, pointing to a group and pointing to a netfs_folio struct, leading to potential multiple attachments of private data with associated folio ref leaks and also leaks of netfs_folio structs or netfs_group refs. Fix this by consolidating the place at which a folio is marked uptodate in one place and having that look at what&amp;#39;s attached to folio-&amp;gt;private and decide how to clean it up and then set the new group.  Also, the content shouldn&amp;#39;t be flushed if group is NULL, even if a group is specified in the netfs_group parameter, as that would be the case for a new folio.  A filesystem should always specify netfs_group or never specify netfs_group. The Sashiko auto-review tool noted that it was theoretically possible that the fpos &amp;gt;= ctx-&amp;gt;zero_point section might leak if it modified a streaming write folio.  This is unlikely, but with a network filesystem, third party changes can happen.  It also pointed out that __netfs_set_group() would leak if called multiple times on the same folio from the &amp;#34;whole folio modify section&amp;#34;.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2026-64059</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>WID-SEC-W-2026-2403 — Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen ermöglichen nicht spezifizierten Angriff</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-2403</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen nicht näher spezifizierten Angriff durchzuführen, möglicherweise Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand herbeizuführen oder vertrauliche Informationen offenzulegen.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen nicht näher spezifizierten Angriff durchzuführen, möglicherweise Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand herbeizuführen oder vertrauliche Informationen offenzulegen.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-2403</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
