<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2026 16:46:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2026-31539 — smb: smbdirect: introduce smbdirect_socket.recv_io.credits.available</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-31539</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;smb: smbdirect: introduce smbdirect_socket.recv_io.credits.available&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The logic off managing recv credits by counting posted recv_io and
granted credits is racy.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That&amp;#39;s because the peer might already consumed a credit,
but between receiving the incoming recv at the hardware
and processing the completion in the &amp;#39;recv_done&amp;#39; functions
we likely have a window where we grant credits, which
don&amp;#39;t really exist.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So we better have a decicated counter for the
available credits, which will be incremented
when we posted new recv buffers and drained when
we grant the credits to the peer.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;smb: smbdirect: introduce smbdirect_socket.recv_io.credits.available&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The logic off managing recv credits by counting posted recv_io and
granted credits is racy.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That&amp;#39;s because the peer might already consumed a credit,
but between receiving the incoming recv at the hardware
and processing the completion in the &amp;#39;recv_done&amp;#39; functions
we likely have a window where we grant credits, which
don&amp;#39;t really exist.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So we better have a decicated counter for the
available credits, which will be incremented
when we posted new recv buffers and drained when
we grant the credits to the peer.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-31539</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
