In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: block: don't overwrite bip_vcnt in bio_integrity_copy_user() bio_integrity_add_page() already sets bip_vcnt to 1 for the bounce segment. Overwriting it with nr_vecs breaks bip_vcnt <= bip_max_vcnt on WRITE (bip_max_vcnt is 1), so the gap-merge checks in block/blk.h read past the bip_vec[] flex array. On READ the read is in bounds but lands on a saved user bvec instead of the bounce. The line was added for split propagation, b
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
block: don't overwrite bip_vcnt in bio_integrity_copy_user()
bio_integrity_add_page() already sets bip_vcnt to 1 for the bounce segment. Overwriting it with nr_vecs breaks bip_vcnt <= bip_max_vcnt on WRITE (bip_max_vcnt is 1), so the gap-merge checks in block/blk.h read past the bip_vec[] flex array. On READ the read is in bounds but lands on a saved user bvec instead of the bounce.
The line was added for split propagation, but bio_integrity_clone() doesn't copy bip_vcnt and BIP_CLONE_FLAGS excludes BIP_COPY_USER.
Why this VPI (explainable, experimental)
VPI breakdown
| Impact | 78.00 |
| Exploitation signal(No additional exploitation signal) | ×1.00 |
| VPI | 78.00 |
VPI formula vpi-v1