Threats Tagged 'ubuntu-cve-2026-53320'
View all threats tagged with 'ubuntu-cve-2026-53320'. Filter and sort to focus on specific types of threats.
Stop chasing alerts. Route them.
Start free, then upgrade once to turn Radar into an automated delivery engine for your security stack.
Custom feeds / Automations: email, Slack, webhooks, SIEM/MISP / API access (baseline limits)
API access activates after upgrading in Console -> Billing.
Check if your credentials are on the dark web
Instant breach scanning across billions of leaked records. Free tier available.
Filter Threats
Narrow down the results by type, severity, or affected countries
Threats Tagged 'ubuntu-cve-2026-53320'
Click on any threat for detailed analysis and mitigation recommendations
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nilfs2: reject zero bd_oblocknr in nilfs_ioctl_mark_blocks_dirty()… (CVE-2026-53320)CVE-2026-53320 0 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nilfs2: reject zero bd_oblocknr in nilfs_ioctl_mark_blocks_dirty() nilfs_ioctl_mark_blocks_dirty() uses bd_oblocknr to detect dead blocks by comparing it with the current block number bd_blocknr. If they differ, the block is considered dead and skipped. However, bd_oblocknr should never be 0 since block 0 typically stores the primary superblock and is never a valid GC target block. A corrupted ioctl request with bd_oblocknr set to 0 causes the comparison to incorrectly match when the lookup returns -ENOENT and sets bd_blocknr to 0, bypassing the dead block check and calling nilfs_bmap_mark() on a non-existent block. This causes nilfs_btree_do_lookup() to return -ENOENT, triggering the WARN_ON(ret == -ENOENT). Fix this by rejecting ioctl requests with bd_oblocknr set to 0 at the beginning of each iteration. [ryusuke: slightly modified the commit message and comments for accuracy] Join the discussion | GCVE Database | 06/26/2026, 20:17:00 UTC Added: 07/17/2026, 10:15:28 UTC |
Showing 1 to 1 of 1 result