CVE-2026-89436

  • Автор темы Автор темы Support
  • Дата начала Дата начала

Support

Moderator
Команда форума
MODERATOR
User RTM
Регистрация
30 Мар 2024
Сообщения
132,872
Реакции
4
Баллы
0
☑ ДЕПОЗИТ
0$
🚨 CVE-2026-89436
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

platform/x86: panasonic-laptop: Fix sentinel write past pcc->sinf[]

acpi_pcc_retrieve_biosdata() rejects SINF packages only when
pcc->num_sifr is strictly less than hkey->package.count, then
unconditionally writes a trailing sentinel at
pcc->sinf[hkey->package.count]. But pcc->sinf[] is allocated with
exactly pcc->num_sifr elements (valid indices 0..num_sifr-1), so that
write needs num_sifr strictly greater than package.count to stay in
bounds -- num_sifr == package.count passes the existing check but
still overflows by one element.

This is exactly the case probe()'s existing num_sifr++ workaround
("Some DSDT-s have an off-by-one bug where the SINF package count is
one higher than the SQTY reported value") is written to accommodate:
when a DSDT's SINF package count equals SQTY+1, the workaround makes
num_sifr equal to package.count, which is precisely the boundary that
overflows here. Found via UBSan (array-index-out-of-bounds) on
hardware where HKEY.SQTY returns 37 and HKEY.SINF()'s package has 38
elements: num_sifr becomes 38 after the += 1 workaround, the loop
correctly fills indices 0..37, and the sentinel write then targets
index 38, one past the end -- a silent 4-byte heap overflow on kernels
without CONFIG_UBSAN.

Tightening the rejection check to num_sifr <= package.count would
avoid the overflow but breaks probe() entirely on exactly this
hardware, since num_sifr == package.count is the case the off-by-one
workaround exists to support. Nothing else in the driver reads this
sentinel value back, so simply skip the write when there is no room
for it instead.

 
Автоматический гарант это финансовая безопасность: Покупатель может быть уверен, что его деньги не попадут к продавцу до того, как он получит и проверит товар или услугу. Продавец, в свою очередь, защищен от не оплаты, так как гарант подтверждает наличие средств у покупателя до начала выполнения обязательств.
Назад
Сверху