CVE-2026-64063

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

netfs: Fix streaming write being overwritten

In order to avoid reading whilst writing, netfslib will allow streaming writes in which dirty data is stored directly into folios without reading them first. Such folios are marked dirty but may not be marked uptodate. If a folio is entirely written by a streaming write, uptodate will be set, otherwise it will have a netfs_folio struct attached to ->private recording the dirty region.

In the event that a partially written streaming write page is to be overwritten entirely by a single write(), netfs_perform_write() will try to copy over it, but doesnt discard the netfs_folio if it succeeds; further, it doesnt correctly handle a partial copy that overwrites some of the dirty data.

Fix this by the following:

(1) If the folio is successfully overwritten, free the netfs_folio struct before marking the page uptodate.

(2) If the copy to the folio partially fails, but short of the dirty data, just ignore the copy.

(3) If the copy partially fails and overwrites some of the dirty data, accept the copy, update the netfs_folio struct to record the new data. If the folio is now filled, free the netfs_folio and set uptodate, otherwise return a partial write.

Found with:

fsx -q -N 1000000 -p 10000 -o 128000 -l 600000 
  /xfstest.test/junk --replay-ops=junk.fsxops

using the following as junk.fsxops:

truncate 0x0 0 0x927c0
write 0x63fb8 0x53c8 0
copy_range 0xb704 0x19b9 0x24429 0x79380
write 0x2402b 0x144a2 0x90660 *
write 0x204d5 0x140a0 0x927c0 *
copy_range 0x1f72c 0x137d0 0x7a906 0x927c0 *
read 0x00000 0x20000 0x9157c
read 0x20000 0x20000 0x9157c
read 0x40000 0x20000 0x9157c
read 0x60000 0x20000 0x9157c
read 0x7e1a0 0xcfb9 0x9157c

on cifs with the default cache option.

It shows folio 0x24 misbehaving if the FMODE_READ check is commented out in netfs_perform_write():

	if (//(file->f_mode & FMODE_READ) ||
	    netfs_is_cache_enabled(ctx)) {

and no fscache. This was initially found with the generic/522 xfstest.

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/20195925c768626dc901a4781a51e508702c88ad
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/7b4dcf1b9455a6e52ac7478b4057dbe10359576d
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/cdae00e8e215d95911d95f100599e187b6560de5
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ef9b521212e4863814ef7dfe19889abaf55ca840