CVE-2026-43075

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

ocfs2: fix out-of-bounds write in ocfs2_write_end_inline

KASAN reports a use-after-free write of 4086 bytes in ocfs2_write_end_inline, called from ocfs2_write_end_nolock during a copy_file_range splice fallback on a corrupted ocfs2 filesystem mounted on a loop device. The actual bug is an out-of-bounds write past the inode block buffer, not a true use-after-free. The write overflows into an adjacent freed page, which KASAN reports as UAF.

The root cause is that ocfs2_try_to_write_inline_data trusts the on-disk id_count field to determine whether a write fits in inline data. On a corrupted filesystem, id_count can exceed the physical maximum inline data capacity, causing writes to overflow the inode block buffer.

Call trace (crash path):

vfs_copy_file_range (fs/read_write.c:1634) do_splice_direct splice_direct_to_actor iter_file_splice_write ocfs2_file_write_iter generic_perform_write ocfs2_write_end ocfs2_write_end_nolock (fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1949) ocfs2_write_end_inline (fs/ocfs2/aops.c:1915) memcpy_from_folio <– KASAN: write OOB

So add id_count upper bound check in ocfs2_validate_inode_block() to alongside the existing i_size check to fix it.

Weakness

The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

Affected Software

Potential Mitigations

• Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

• For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer.

• Be wary that a language’s interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.

• Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

• Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega [REF-57], and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft [REF-56]. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.

• Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking.

• D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND [REF-1334] discusses canary-based detection in detail.

• Consider adhering to the following rules when allocating and managing an application’s memory:

• Run or compile the software using features or extensions that randomly arrange the positions of a program’s executable and libraries in memory. Because this makes the addresses unpredictable, it can prevent an attacker from reliably jumping to exploitable code.

• Examples include Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) [REF-58] [REF-60] and Position-Independent Executables (PIE) [REF-64]. Imported modules may be similarly realigned if their default memory addresses conflict with other modules, in a process known as “rebasing” (for Windows) and “prelinking” (for Linux) [REF-1332] using randomly generated addresses. ASLR for libraries cannot be used in conjunction with prelink since it would require relocating the libraries at run-time, defeating the whole purpose of prelinking.

• For more information on these techniques see D3-SAOR (Segment Address Offset Randomization) from D3FEND [REF-1335].

• Use a CPU and operating system that offers Data Execution Protection (using hardware NX or XD bits) or the equivalent techniques that simulate this feature in software, such as PaX [REF-60] [REF-61]. These techniques ensure that any instruction executed is exclusively at a memory address that is part of the code segment.

• For more information on these techniques see D3-PSEP (Process Segment Execution Prevention) from D3FEND [REF-1336].

References

• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/0c1af902223b6fcedb60904ca0b551254686c7b9
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/22df7d4de9c5cd42edf855a1de25f2106088c4c6
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2e6a254f9cedf51b75cc20b8b92e2209bfa04c3e
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/68f9cc3bbf2ae501770cea7dc0005fc9a85e48ea
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/69d3c69ade1e4285ab4ca48fe7acee0767e65604
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/7bc5da4842bed3252d26e742213741a4d0ac1b14
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/947f953978b0d9463498d548d0f054f5a75be2e9
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e2c9dc6b6e96f3585f2a1062ca3374a52db0938f