GCVE Workshop - 22 September 2026 (14:00-18:00), Luxembourg Before The Vulnopticon Conference - Registration

GHSA-Q27P-5553-XHRR

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-11 21:31 – Updated: 2026-09-13 09:32
VLAI
Details

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

smb: client: fix UAF and buffer leak in cifs_check_trans2() for malformed secondary T2

When a valid primary TRANSACT2 response has been received (mid->resp_buf set, mid->multiRsp true) and a subsequent secondary response causes cifs_check_trans2() to return false -- either because the SMB header is invalid (malformed != 0) or because check2ndT2() rejects the PDU -- handle_mid() overwrites mid->resp_buf with the new buffer (leaking the primary buffer) and, because mid->multiRsp is set, skips the server->smallbuf/bigbuf NULL-out. When the user thread frees mid->resp_buf, server->smallbuf or server->bigbuf is left dangling; the demux thread reuses it for the next packet, resulting in a use-after-free.

Combine both early-exit conditions and, when mid->multiRsp is already set, abort the pending transaction inline: set multiEnd, call dequeue_mid() with malformed=true, and return true so handle_mid() exits without touching mid->resp_buf or the server buffer pointers.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-89637"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-09-11T20:19:49Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nsmb: client: fix UAF and buffer leak in cifs_check_trans2() for malformed secondary T2\n\nWhen a valid primary TRANSACT2 response has been received (mid-\u003eresp_buf\nset, mid-\u003emultiRsp true) and a subsequent secondary response causes\ncifs_check_trans2() to return false -- either because the SMB header is\ninvalid (malformed != 0) or because check2ndT2() rejects the PDU --\nhandle_mid() overwrites mid-\u003eresp_buf with the new buffer (leaking the\nprimary buffer) and, because mid-\u003emultiRsp is set, skips the\nserver-\u003esmallbuf/bigbuf NULL-out.  When the user thread frees\nmid-\u003eresp_buf, server-\u003esmallbuf or server-\u003ebigbuf is left dangling; the\ndemux thread reuses it for the next packet, resulting in a use-after-free.\n\nCombine both early-exit conditions and, when mid-\u003emultiRsp is already\nset, abort the pending transaction inline: set multiEnd, call\ndequeue_mid() with malformed=true, and return true so handle_mid() exits\nwithout touching mid-\u003eresp_buf or the server buffer pointers.",
  "id": "GHSA-q27p-5553-xhrr",
  "modified": "2026-09-13T09:32:26Z",
  "published": "2026-09-11T21:31:34Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-89637"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/5e6533a683f6a851158d9f33fb4ea8f4f25d7f84"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/730d0bb19507b9e19c2fe5343109ac618e2fbce5"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/9eed72e9534b10a6d9f8f5146feff3db53aebdba"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…

Loading…