https://cve.radiocsirt.org Contains only the most 10 recent entries. http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification python-feedgen en Fri, 02 Oct 2026 15:25:43 +0000 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bell-cve-2026-89985 <p><strong>Withdrawn by the publisher.</strong></p> <p><strong>Withdrawn by the publisher.</strong></p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bell-cve-2026-89985 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-369503 EUVD-2026-369503 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-369503 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-89985 <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>memcg: keep folio&#39;s objcg same as its node</p> <p>memcg_reparent_objcgs() has an inherent assumption that a folio&#39;s objcg is the objcg of the folio&#39;s node. Folio migration across nodes breaks that assumption: the new folio simply inherits the old folio&#39;s objcg while living on a different node.</p> <p>Once the assumption is broken, the reparenting of the folio&#39;s objcg and the reparenting of the folio&#39;s LRU list are no longer atomic. memcg_reparent_objcgs() handles one node per iteration and drops all the locks in between, so the objcg gets reparented in the iteration for the objcg&#39;s node while the LRU list gets spliced in the iteration for the folio&#39;s node. Any LRU operation on that folio in between resolves its lruvec through the objcg, and thus takes the lru_lock of the wrong memcg, not the lru_lock of the list the folio is actually on.</p> <p>Fix this by selecting the objcg by folio_nid() at charge time, and by re-deriving it for the destination node in mem_cgroup_migrate() and mem_cgroup_replace_folio().</p> <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>memcg: keep folio&#39;s objcg same as its node</p> <p>memcg_reparent_objcgs() has an inherent assumption that a folio&#39;s objcg is the objcg of the folio&#39;s node. Folio migration across nodes breaks that assumption: the new folio simply inherits the old folio&#39;s objcg while living on a different node.</p> <p>Once the assumption is broken, the reparenting of the folio&#39;s objcg and the reparenting of the folio&#39;s LRU list are no longer atomic. memcg_reparent_objcgs() handles one node per iteration and drops all the locks in between, so the objcg gets reparented in the iteration for the objcg&#39;s node while the LRU list gets spliced in the iteration for the folio&#39;s node. Any LRU operation on that folio in between resolves its lruvec through the objcg, and thus takes the lru_lock of the wrong memcg, not the lru_lock of the list the folio is actually on.</p> <p>Fix this by selecting the objcg by folio_nid() at charge time, and by re-deriving it for the destination node in mem_cgroup_migrate() and mem_cgroup_replace_folio().</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-89985 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-5r45-xw38-xrg8 <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>memcg: keep folio&#39;s objcg same as its node</p> <p>memcg_reparent_objcgs() has an inherent assumption that a folio&#39;s objcg is the objcg of the folio&#39;s node. Folio migration across nodes breaks that assumption: the new folio simply inherits the old folio&#39;s objcg while living on a different node.</p> <p>Once the assumption is broken, the reparenting of the folio&#39;s objcg and the reparenting of the folio&#39;s LRU list are no longer atomic. memcg_reparent_objcgs() handles one node per iteration and drops all the locks in between, so the objcg gets reparented in the iteration for the objcg&#39;s node while the LRU list gets spliced in the iteration for the folio&#39;s node. Any LRU operation on that folio in between resolves its lruvec through the objcg, and thus takes the lru_lock of the wrong memcg, not the lru_lock of the list the folio is actually on.</p> <p>Fix this by selecting the objcg by folio_nid() at charge time, and by re-deriving it for the destination node in mem_cgroup_migrate() and mem_cgroup_replace_folio().</p> <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>memcg: keep folio&#39;s objcg same as its node</p> <p>memcg_reparent_objcgs() has an inherent assumption that a folio&#39;s objcg is the objcg of the folio&#39;s node. Folio migration across nodes breaks that assumption: the new folio simply inherits the old folio&#39;s objcg while living on a different node.</p> <p>Once the assumption is broken, the reparenting of the folio&#39;s objcg and the reparenting of the folio&#39;s LRU list are no longer atomic. memcg_reparent_objcgs() handles one node per iteration and drops all the locks in between, so the objcg gets reparented in the iteration for the objcg&#39;s node while the LRU list gets spliced in the iteration for the folio&#39;s node. Any LRU operation on that folio in between resolves its lruvec through the objcg, and thus takes the lru_lock of the wrong memcg, not the lru_lock of the list the folio is actually on.</p> <p>Fix this by selecting the objcg by folio_nid() at charge time, and by re-deriving it for the destination node in mem_cgroup_migrate() and mem_cgroup_replace_folio().</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-5r45-xw38-xrg8 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/opensuse-su-2026:11880-1 <p>kernel-devel-7.2.7-1.1 on GA media</p> <p>kernel-devel-7.2.7-1.1 on GA media</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/opensuse-su-2026:11880-1 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2026-89985 <p><strong>Affected:</strong> 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 96 more</p> <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: memcg: keep folio&#39;s objcg same as its node memcg_reparent_objcgs() has an inherent assumption that a folio&#39;s objcg is the objcg of the folio&#39;s node. Folio migration across nodes breaks that assumption: the new folio simply inherits the old folio&#39;s objcg while living on a different node. Once the assumption is broken, the reparenting of the folio&#39;s objcg and the reparenting of the folio&#39;s LRU list are no longer atomic. memcg_reparent_objcgs() handles one node per iteration and drops all the locks in between, so the objcg gets reparented in the iteration for the objcg&#39;s node while the LRU list gets spliced in the iteration for the folio&#39;s node. Any LRU operation on that folio in between resolves its lruvec through the objcg, and thus takes the lru_lock of the wrong memcg, not the lru_lock of the list the folio is actually on. Fix this by selecting the objcg by folio_nid() at charge time, and by re-deriving it for the destination node in mem_cgroup_migrate() and mem_cgroup_replace_folio().</p> <p><strong>Affected:</strong> 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 96 more</p> <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: memcg: keep folio&#39;s objcg same as its node memcg_reparent_objcgs() has an inherent assumption that a folio&#39;s objcg is the objcg of the folio&#39;s node. Folio migration across nodes breaks that assumption: the new folio simply inherits the old folio&#39;s objcg while living on a different node. Once the assumption is broken, the reparenting of the folio&#39;s objcg and the reparenting of the folio&#39;s LRU list are no longer atomic. memcg_reparent_objcgs() handles one node per iteration and drops all the locks in between, so the objcg gets reparented in the iteration for the objcg&#39;s node while the LRU list gets spliced in the iteration for the folio&#39;s node. Any LRU operation on that folio in between resolves its lruvec through the objcg, and thus takes the lru_lock of the wrong memcg, not the lru_lock of the list the folio is actually on. Fix this by selecting the objcg by folio_nid() at charge time, and by re-deriving it for the destination node in mem_cgroup_migrate() and mem_cgroup_replace_folio().</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2026-89985 https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-3438 <p>Ein lokaler Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service zu verursachen oder eine nicht näher spezifizierte Auswirkung zu erzielen.</p> <p>Ein lokaler Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service zu verursachen oder eine nicht näher spezifizierte Auswirkung zu erzielen.</p> https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-3438