<?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>Sun, 04 Oct 2026 20:40:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2023-52699 — sysv: don't call sb_bread() with pointers_lock held</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2023-52699</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;sysv: don&amp;#39;t call sb_bread() with pointers_lock held&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;syzbot is reporting sleep in atomic context in SysV filesystem [1], for
sb_bread() is called with rw_spinlock held.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A &amp;#34;write_lock(&amp;amp;pointers_lock) =&amp;gt; read_lock(&amp;amp;pointers_lock) deadlock&amp;#34; bug
and a &amp;#34;sb_bread() with write_lock(&amp;amp;pointers_lock)&amp;#34; bug were introduced by
&amp;#34;Replace BKL for chain locking with sysvfs-private rwlock&amp;#34; in Linux 2.5.12.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Then, &amp;#34;[PATCH] err1-40: sysvfs locking fix&amp;#34; in Linux 2.6.8 fixed the
former bug by moving pointers_lock lock to the callers, but instead
introduced a &amp;#34;sb_bread() with read_lock(&amp;amp;pointers_lock)&amp;#34; bug (which made
this problem easier to hit).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Al Viro suggested that why not to do like get_branch()/get_block()/
find_shared() in Minix filesystem does. And doing like that is almost a
revert of &amp;#34;[PATCH] err1-40: sysvfs locking fix&amp;#34; except that get_branch()
 from with find_shared() is called without write_lock(&amp;amp;pointers_lock).&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;sysv: don&amp;#39;t call sb_bread() with pointers_lock held&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;syzbot is reporting sleep in atomic context in SysV filesystem [1], for
sb_bread() is called with rw_spinlock held.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A &amp;#34;write_lock(&amp;amp;pointers_lock) =&amp;gt; read_lock(&amp;amp;pointers_lock) deadlock&amp;#34; bug
and a &amp;#34;sb_bread() with write_lock(&amp;amp;pointers_lock)&amp;#34; bug were introduced by
&amp;#34;Replace BKL for chain locking with sysvfs-private rwlock&amp;#34; in Linux 2.5.12.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Then, &amp;#34;[PATCH] err1-40: sysvfs locking fix&amp;#34; in Linux 2.6.8 fixed the
former bug by moving pointers_lock lock to the callers, but instead
introduced a &amp;#34;sb_bread() with read_lock(&amp;amp;pointers_lock)&amp;#34; bug (which made
this problem easier to hit).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Al Viro suggested that why not to do like get_branch()/get_block()/
find_shared() in Minix filesystem does. And doing like that is almost a
revert of &amp;#34;[PATCH] err1-40: sysvfs locking fix&amp;#34; except that get_branch()
 from with find_shared() is called without write_lock(&amp;amp;pointers_lock).&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2023-52699</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
