https://cve.radiocsirt.org Contains only the most 10 recent entries. http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification python-feedgen en Sat, 03 Oct 2026 09:41:24 +0000 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bell-cve-2026-72472 <p><strong>Affected:</strong> Alpaquita:23: linux-lts, Alpaquita:25: linux-lts, Alpaquita:stream: linux-lts</p> <p><strong>Affected:</strong> Alpaquita:23: linux-lts, Alpaquita:25: linux-lts, Alpaquita:stream: linux-lts</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bell-cve-2026-72472 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/certfr-2026-avi-1203 certfr-2026-avi-1203 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/certfr-2026-avi-1203 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-354116 EUVD-2026-354116 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-354116 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-72472 <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>nfs: use nfsi-&gt;rwsem to protect traversal of the file lock list</p> <p>Lingfeng identified a bug and suggested two solutions, but both appear to have issues.</p> <p>Generally, we cannot release flc_lock while iterating over the file lock list to avoid use-after-free (UAF) problems with file locks. However, functions like nfs_delegation_claim_locks and nfs4_reclaim_locks cannot adhere to this rule because recover_lock or nfs4_lock_delegation_recall may take a long time. To resolve this, NFS switches to using nfsi-&gt;rwsem for the same protection, and nfs_reclaim_locks follows this approach. Although nfs_delegation_claim_locks uses so_delegreturn_mutex instead, this is inadequate since a single inode can have multiple nfs4_state instances. Therefore, the fix is to also use nfsi-&gt;rwsem in this case.</p> <p>Furthermore, after commit c69899a17ca4 (&#34;NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update&#34;), the functions nfs4_locku_done and nfs4_lock_done also break this rule because they call locks_lock_inode_wait without holding nfsi-&gt;rwsem. Simply adding this protection could cause many deadlocks, so instead, the call to locks_lock_inode_wait is moved into _nfs4_proc_setlk. Regarding the bug fixed by commit c69899a17ca4 (&#34;NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update&#34;), it has been resolved after commit 0460253913e5 (&#34;NFSv4: nfs4_do_open() is incorrectly triggering state recovery&#34;…</p> <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>nfs: use nfsi-&gt;rwsem to protect traversal of the file lock list</p> <p>Lingfeng identified a bug and suggested two solutions, but both appear to have issues.</p> <p>Generally, we cannot release flc_lock while iterating over the file lock list to avoid use-after-free (UAF) problems with file locks. However, functions like nfs_delegation_claim_locks and nfs4_reclaim_locks cannot adhere to this rule because recover_lock or nfs4_lock_delegation_recall may take a long time. To resolve this, NFS switches to using nfsi-&gt;rwsem for the same protection, and nfs_reclaim_locks follows this approach. Although nfs_delegation_claim_locks uses so_delegreturn_mutex instead, this is inadequate since a single inode can have multiple nfs4_state instances. Therefore, the fix is to also use nfsi-&gt;rwsem in this case.</p> <p>Furthermore, after commit c69899a17ca4 (&#34;NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update&#34;), the functions nfs4_locku_done and nfs4_lock_done also break this rule because they call locks_lock_inode_wait without holding nfsi-&gt;rwsem. Simply adding this protection could cause many deadlocks, so instead, the call to locks_lock_inode_wait is moved into _nfs4_proc_setlk. Regarding the bug fixed by commit c69899a17ca4 (&#34;NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update&#34;), it has been resolved after commit 0460253913e5 (&#34;NFSv4: nfs4_do_open() is incorrectly triggering state recovery&#34;…</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-72472 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-r6m9-5pwq-jfm2 <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>nfs: use nfsi-&gt;rwsem to protect traversal of the file lock list</p> <p>Lingfeng identified a bug and suggested two solutions, but both appear to have issues.</p> <p>Generally, we cannot release flc_lock while iterating over the file lock list to avoid use-after-free (UAF) problems with file locks. However, functions like nfs_delegation_claim_locks and nfs4_reclaim_locks cannot adhere to this rule because recover_lock or nfs4_lock_delegation_recall may take a long time. To resolve this, NFS switches to using nfsi-&gt;rwsem for the same protection, and nfs_reclaim_locks follows this approach. Although nfs_delegation_claim_locks uses so_delegreturn_mutex instead, this is inadequate since a single inode can have multiple nfs4_state instances. Therefore, the fix is to also use nfsi-&gt;rwsem in this case.</p> <p>Furthermore, after commit c69899a17ca4 (&#34;NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update&#34;), the functions nfs4_locku_done and nfs4_lock_done also break this rule because they call locks_lock_inode_wait without holding nfsi-&gt;rwsem. Simply adding this protection could cause many deadlocks, so instead, the call to locks_lock_inode_wait is moved into _nfs4_proc_setlk. Regarding the bug fixed by commit c69899a17ca4 (&#34;NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update&#34;), it has been resolved after commit 0460253913e5 (&#34;NFSv4: nfs4_do_open() is incorrectly triggering state recovery&#34;…</p> <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>nfs: use nfsi-&gt;rwsem to protect traversal of the file lock list</p> <p>Lingfeng identified a bug and suggested two solutions, but both appear to have issues.</p> <p>Generally, we cannot release flc_lock while iterating over the file lock list to avoid use-after-free (UAF) problems with file locks. However, functions like nfs_delegation_claim_locks and nfs4_reclaim_locks cannot adhere to this rule because recover_lock or nfs4_lock_delegation_recall may take a long time. To resolve this, NFS switches to using nfsi-&gt;rwsem for the same protection, and nfs_reclaim_locks follows this approach. Although nfs_delegation_claim_locks uses so_delegreturn_mutex instead, this is inadequate since a single inode can have multiple nfs4_state instances. Therefore, the fix is to also use nfsi-&gt;rwsem in this case.</p> <p>Furthermore, after commit c69899a17ca4 (&#34;NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update&#34;), the functions nfs4_locku_done and nfs4_lock_done also break this rule because they call locks_lock_inode_wait without holding nfsi-&gt;rwsem. Simply adding this protection could cause many deadlocks, so instead, the call to locks_lock_inode_wait is moved into _nfs4_proc_setlk. Regarding the bug fixed by commit c69899a17ca4 (&#34;NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update&#34;), it has been resolved after commit 0460253913e5 (&#34;NFSv4: nfs4_do_open() is incorrectly triggering state recovery&#34;…</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-r6m9-5pwq-jfm2 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/msrc_cve-2026-72472 msrc_CVE-2026-72472 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/msrc_cve-2026-72472 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2026-72472 <p><strong>Affected:</strong> 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 245 more</p> <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nfs: use nfsi-&gt;rwsem to protect traversal of the file lock list Lingfeng identified a bug and suggested two solutions, but both appear to have issues. Generally, we cannot release flc_lock while iterating over the file lock list to avoid use-after-free (UAF) problems with file locks. However, functions like nfs_delegation_claim_locks and nfs4_reclaim_locks cannot adhere to this rule because recover_lock or nfs4_lock_delegation_recall may take a long time. To resolve this, NFS switches to using nfsi-&gt;rwsem for the same protection, and nfs_reclaim_locks follows this approach. Although nfs_delegation_claim_locks uses so_delegreturn_mutex instead, this is inadequate since a single inode can have multiple nfs4_state instances. Therefore, the fix is to also use nfsi-&gt;rwsem in this case. Furthermore, after commit c69899a17ca4 (&#34;NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update&#34;), the functions nfs4_locku_done and nfs4_lock_done also break this rule because they call locks_lock_inode_wait without holding nfsi-&gt;rwsem. Simply adding this protection could cause many deadlocks, so instead, the call to locks_lock_inode_wait is moved into _nfs4_proc_setlk. Regarding the bug fixed by commit c69899a17ca4 (&#34;NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update&#34;), it has been resolved after commit 0460253913e5 (&#34;NFSv4: nfs4_do_open() is incorrectly triggering state recovery&#34;) be…</p> <p><strong>Affected:</strong> 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 245 more</p> <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nfs: use nfsi-&gt;rwsem to protect traversal of the file lock list Lingfeng identified a bug and suggested two solutions, but both appear to have issues. Generally, we cannot release flc_lock while iterating over the file lock list to avoid use-after-free (UAF) problems with file locks. However, functions like nfs_delegation_claim_locks and nfs4_reclaim_locks cannot adhere to this rule because recover_lock or nfs4_lock_delegation_recall may take a long time. To resolve this, NFS switches to using nfsi-&gt;rwsem for the same protection, and nfs_reclaim_locks follows this approach. Although nfs_delegation_claim_locks uses so_delegreturn_mutex instead, this is inadequate since a single inode can have multiple nfs4_state instances. Therefore, the fix is to also use nfsi-&gt;rwsem in this case. Furthermore, after commit c69899a17ca4 (&#34;NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update&#34;), the functions nfs4_locku_done and nfs4_lock_done also break this rule because they call locks_lock_inode_wait without holding nfsi-&gt;rwsem. Simply adding this protection could cause many deadlocks, so instead, the call to locks_lock_inode_wait is moved into _nfs4_proc_setlk. Regarding the bug fixed by commit c69899a17ca4 (&#34;NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update&#34;), it has been resolved after commit 0460253913e5 (&#34;NFSv4: nfs4_do_open() is incorrectly triggering state recovery&#34;) be…</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2026-72472 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-2852 <p>Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um root Rechte zu erlangen, um einen Denial of Service herbeizuführen oder einen nicht näher spezifizierten Angriff durchzuführen.</p> <p>Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um root Rechte zu erlangen, um einen Denial of Service herbeizuführen oder einen nicht näher spezifizierten Angriff durchzuführen.</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-2852