Skip to content

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been...

Critical severity Unreviewed Published Jul 25, 2026 to the GitHub Advisory Database • Updated Jul 27, 2026

Package

No package listedSuggest a package

Affected versions

Unknown

Patched versions

Unknown

Description

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

RDMA/rtrs-srv: Bound RDMA-Write length to chunk size in rdma_write_sg

When the server answers an RTRS READ, rdma_write_sg() builds the source
scatter/gather entry for the IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE that returns data to the
peer. Its length is taken directly from the wire descriptor:

plist->length = le32_to_cpu(id->rd_msg->desc[0].len);

rd_msg points into the chunk buffer that the remote peer filled via
RDMA-WRITE-WITH-IMM (rtrs_srv_rdma_done() -> process_io_req() ->
process_read()), so desc[0].len is attacker-controlled and, before this
change, was only rejected when zero. The source address is the fixed
chunk start (dma_addr[msg_id]) and the source lkey is the PD-wide
local_dma_lkey, which is not tied to the chunk's MR mapping, so the verbs
layer does not constrain the transfer length to max_chunk_size. msg_id
and off are bounded against queue_depth and max_chunk_size in
rtrs_srv_rdma_done(), but desc[0].len is a separate field that was not
checked against the chunk size.

A peer that advertises desc[0].len larger than max_chunk_size can make
the posted RDMA write read past the chunk's mapped region. The resulting
behaviour depends on the IOMMU configuration: with no IOMMU or in
passthrough mode the read may extend into memory adjacent to the chunk
and be returned to the peer, which can disclose host memory; with a
translating IOMMU the out-of-range access is expected to fault and abort
the connection. In either case the transfer exceeds what the protocol
permits and is driven by a remote peer.

Reject a descriptor length above max_chunk_size, mirroring the existing
off >= max_chunk_size bound in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(). Legitimate clients
do not exceed it: the client sets desc[0].len to its MR length, which is
capped at the negotiated max_io_size (max_chunk_size - MAX_HDR_SIZE).

References

Published by the National Vulnerability Database Jul 25, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jul 25, 2026
Last updated Jul 27, 2026

Severity

Critical

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
High

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(11th percentile)

Weaknesses

No CWEs

CVE ID

CVE-2026-64269

GHSA ID

GHSA-ffxc-rc5x-r6rp

Source code

No known source code

Dependabot alerts are not supported on this advisory because it does not have a package from a supported ecosystem with an affected and fixed version.

Learn more about GitHub language support

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.