<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-10-03T23:41:08.808732+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@circl.lu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2024-38610</id>
    <title>CVE-2024-38610 — drivers/virt/acrn: fix PFNMAP PTE checks in acrn_vm_ram_map()</title>
    <updated>2026-10-03T23:41:08.923509+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> Linux</p>
<p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p>
<p>drivers/virt/acrn: fix PFNMAP PTE checks in acrn_vm_ram_map()</p>
<p>Patch series "mm: follow_pte() improvements and acrn follow_pte() fixes".</p>
<p>Patch #1 fixes a bunch of issues I spotted in the acrn driver.  It
compiles, that's all I know.  I'll appreciate some review and testing from
acrn folks.</p>
<p>Patch #2+#3 improve follow_pte(), passing a VMA instead of the MM, adding
more sanity checks, and improving the documentation.  Gave it a quick test
on x86-64 using VM_PAT that ends up using follow_pte().</p>
<p>This patch (of 3):</p>
<p>We currently miss handling various cases, resulting in a dangerous
follow_pte() (previously follow_pfn()) usage.</p>
<p>(1) We're not checking PTE write permissions.</p>
<p>Maybe we should simply always require pte_write() like we do for
pin_user_pages_fast(FOLL_WRITE)? Hard to tell, so let's check for
ACRN_MEM_ACCESS_WRITE for now.</p>
<p>(2) We're not rejecting refcounted pages.</p>
<p>As we are not using MMU notifiers, messing with refcounted pages is
dangerous and can result in use-after-free. Let's make sure to reject them.</p>
<p>(3) We are only looking at the first PTE of a bigger range.</p>
<p>We only lookup a single PTE, but memmap-&gt;len may span a larger area.
Let's loop over all involved PTEs and make sure the PFN range is
actually contiguous. Reject everything else: it couldn't have worked
either way, and rather made use access PFNs we shouldn't be accessing.</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2024-38610"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
