CVE-2026-90199

fs/ntfs3: reject out-of-range evcn in mi_enum_attr()

HIGH
7.8
CVSS Score
Published: September 17, 2026 at 04:07 PM UTC
Updated: October 19, 2026 at 09:19 AM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorLinux Kernel

Using Linux by Linux?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect Linux - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
HIGH7.8
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.2%

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fs/ntfs3: reject out-of-range evcn in mi_enum_attr() In mi_enum_attr(), the start/end VCN validation for non-resident attributes is: if (svcn > evcn + 1) goto out; When evcn is U64_MAX the "evcn + 1" expression wraps to 0 and any svcn passes the check. For evcn values close to U64_MAX (but not equal to it) the right-hand side is still a meaningless near-wrap upper bound, so a malformed on-disk attribute with svcn == 0 and evcn near U64_MAX can pass mi_enum_attr() unrejected. VCN (virtual cluster number) is a cluster index, so any valid evcn is bounded by the volume's total cluster count, which ntfs3 holds in sbi->used.bitmap.nbits (set up in ntfs_init_from_boot() before any caller of mi_enum_attr() runs). Reject evcn values that fall outside this range. However, an empty non-resident attribute (no allocated clusters) is legitimately encoded with svcn == 0 and evcn == -1 (U64_MAX), e.g. via attr->nres.evcn = cpu_to_le64((u64)vcn - 1) with vcn == 0. That sentinel must keep passing, so exclude evcn == U64_MAX from the range check. The existing "svcn > evcn + 1" test still tolerates the sentinel ("0 > 0" is false) and continues to require svcn == 0 for it, while the range check rejects every other out-of-range evcn and thereby also defuses the "evcn + 1" wraparound. svcn does not need its own bound: once evcn < nbits, "svcn > evcn + 1" implies svcn <= nbits. [[email protected]: fixed evcn check]

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

013ff63b649475f0ee134e2c8d0c8e65284ede5013ff63b649475f0ee134e2c8d0c8e65284ede501d7dd485108d4f633b543c9c14071cc325b68ae53dfd727873c3e8da74a2e3907120ff052c5f0bcc5.15.2096.1.1156.5.116.6a7accf181a4709a6e380360372150cc4a1b6b89a
Vendor states this is fixed in 0441e34ce098c19185a7b52c5b8b89a8a5b26888 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 20fd9f64c0050658f2031e6bd5d552c6f0c8f7e3 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 2b9a0e57bfd365e2096706b19ae34dce3b4a884b (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7ab69cef49ebdfee288287d62641b24ab1445ecc (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in ce9a619c432b9a4044fee115c5483fbed946c131 (fixed)
Affected range stops below 5.16, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.12.110 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.18.52 (unaffected)
Affected range stops below 6.2, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.6 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.6.157 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7.2.6 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7.3 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7.3-rc1 (unaffected)

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet, and no fixed version or vendor advisory is recorded against it.

CVSS

7.8HIGHLinux
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusRECEIVED

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card