<?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>2026-10-01T19:53:17.948515+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-2026-68148</id>
    <title>CVE-2026-68148 — fscrypt: Add missing superblock check in find_or_insert_direct_key()</title>
    <updated>2026-10-01T19:53:17.970273+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>fscrypt: Add missing superblock check in find_or_insert_direct_key()</p>
<p>The legacy 'fscrypt_direct_keys' table caches master keys that are used
by v1 encryption policies that have FSCRYPT_POLICY_FLAG_DIRECT_KEY.
It's just a global table for all filesystems (since the keys can be
provided by the legacy process-subscribed keyrings mechanism, which
makes it difficult to reuse super_block::s_master_keys).</p>
<p>The entries in it ('struct fscrypt_direct_key') do contain a super_block
pointer, though, for passing to fscrypt_destroy_inline_crypt_key() when
the last inode that references the key is evicted.</p>
<p>However, when finding the fscrypt_direct_key for an inode, we weren't
actually comparing the super_block pointer.  As a result, inodes with
different super_blocks could point to the same fscrypt_direct_key.  That
could extend the lifetime of a fscrypt_direct_key beyond the
super_block it points to, causing a use-after-free later.</p>
<p>Fix this by creating distinct fscrypt_direct_key structs for distinct
super_block structs.</p>
<p>Note that this problem doesn't exist in the v2 policy equivalent
("per-mode keys"), since the data structures there are per super_block.</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-68148"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
