FKIE_CVE-2025-68794

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-01-13 16:16 - Updated: 2026-04-15 00:35
Severity
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: iomap: adjust read range correctly for non-block-aligned positions iomap_adjust_read_range() assumes that the position and length passed in are block-aligned. This is not always the case however, as shown in the syzbot generated case for erofs. This causes too many bytes to be skipped for uptodate blocks, which results in returning the incorrect position and length to read in. If all the blocks are uptodate, this underflows length and returns a position beyond the folio. Fix the calculation to also take into account the block offset when calculating how many bytes can be skipped for uptodate blocks.
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version

{
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\niomap: adjust read range correctly for non-block-aligned positions\n\niomap_adjust_read_range() assumes that the position and length passed in\nare block-aligned. This is not always the case however, as shown in the\nsyzbot generated case for erofs. This causes too many bytes to be\nskipped for uptodate blocks, which results in returning the incorrect\nposition and length to read in. If all the blocks are uptodate, this\nunderflows length and returns a position beyond the folio.\n\nFix the calculation to also take into account the block offset when\ncalculating how many bytes can be skipped for uptodate blocks."
    },
    {
      "lang": "es",
      "value": "En el kernel de Linux, la siguiente vulnerabilidad ha sido resuelta:\n\niomap: ajustar el rango de lectura correctamente para posiciones no alineadas a bloques\n\niomap_adjust_read_range() asume que la posici\u00f3n y la longitud pasadas est\u00e1n alineadas a bloques. Sin embargo, este no siempre es el caso, como se muestra en el caso generado por syzbot para erofs. Esto causa que se salten demasiados bytes para bloques actualizados, lo que resulta en la devoluci\u00f3n de una posici\u00f3n y longitud incorrectas para leer. Si todos los bloques est\u00e1n actualizados, esto provoca un desbordamiento negativo de la longitud y devuelve una posici\u00f3n m\u00e1s all\u00e1 del folio.\n\nCorregir el c\u00e1lculo para tambi\u00e9n tener en cuenta el desplazamiento del bloque al calcular cu\u00e1ntos bytes pueden ser saltados para bloques actualizados."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2025-68794",
  "lastModified": "2026-04-15T00:35:42.020",
  "metrics": {},
  "published": "2026-01-13T16:16:01.310",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/12053695c8ef5410e8cc6c9ed4c0db9cd9c82b3e"
    },
    {
      "source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/142194fb21afe964d2d194cab1fc357cbf87e899"
    },
    {
      "source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/7aa6bc3e8766990824f66ca76c19596ce10daf3e"
    },
    {
      "source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/82b60ffbb532d919959702768dca04c3c0500ae5"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
  "vulnStatus": "Deferred"
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…