CVE-2025-40246
What it is
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xfs: fix out of bounds memory read error in symlink repair xfs/286 produced this report on my test fleet: ================================================================== BUG: KFENCE: out-of-bounds read in memcpy_orig+0x54/0x110 Out-of-bounds read at 0xffff88843fe9e038 (184B right of kfence-#184): memcpy_orig+0x54/0x110 xrep_symlink_salvage_inline+0xb3/0xf0 [xfs] xrep_symlink_salvage+0x100/0x110 [xfs] xrep_symlink+0x2e/0x80 [xfs] xrep_attempt+0x61/0x1f0 [xfs] xfs_scrub_metadata+0x34f/0x5c0 [xfs] xfs_ioc_scrubv_metadata+0x387/0x560 [xfs] xfs_file_ioctl+0xe23/0x10e0 [xfs] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x76/0xc0 do_syscall_64+0x4e/0x1e0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53 kfence-#184: 0xffff88843fe9df80-0xffff88843fe9dfea, size=107, cache=kmalloc-128 allocated by task 3470 on cpu 1 at 263329.131592s (192823.508886s ago): xfs_init_local_fork+0x79/0xe0 [xfs] xfs_iformat_local+0xa4/0x170 [xfs] xfs_iformat_data_fork+0x148/0x180 [xfs] xfs_inode_from_disk+0x2cd/0x480 [xfs] xfs_iget+0x450/0xd60 [xfs] xfs_bulkstat_one_int+0x6b/0x510 [xfs] xfs_bulkstat_iwalk+0x1e/0x30 [xfs] xfs_iwalk_ag_recs+0xdf/0x150 [xfs] xfs_iwalk_run_callbacks+0xb9/0x190 [xfs] xfs_iwalk_ag+0x1dc/0x2f0 [xfs] xfs_iwalk_args.constprop.0+0x6a/0x120 [xfs] xfs_iwalk+0xa4/0xd0 [xfs] xfs_bulkstat+0xfa/0x170 [xfs] xfs_ioc_fsbulkstat.isra.0+0x13a/0x230 [xfs] xfs_file_ioctl+0xbf2/0x10e0 [xfs] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x76/0xc0 do_syscall_64+0x4e/0x1e0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53 CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 1300113 Comm: xfs_scrub Not tainted 6.18.0-rc4-djwx #rc4 PREEMPT(lazy) 3d744dd94e92690f00a04398d2bd8631dcef1954 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.0-4.module+el8.8.0+21164+ed375313 04/01/2014 ================================================================== On further analysis, I realized that the second parameter to min() is not correct. xfs_ifork::if_bytes is the size of the xfs_ifork::if_data buffer. if_bytes can be smaller than the data fork size because: (a) the forkoff code tries to keep the data area as large as possible (b) for symbolic links, if_bytes is the ondisk file size + 1 (c) forkoff is always a multiple of 8. Case in point: for a single-byte symlink target, forkoff will be 8 but the buffer will only be 2 bytes long. In other words, the logic here is wrong and we walk off the end of the incore buffer. Fix that.
At a glance
- Exploit odds
- 0.2% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).
- Fix
- No patch or advisory is linked yet. Look at mitigations or restrict exposure.
Timeline
- PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
- Last updatedMost recent change to the record
Why it ranks here
- Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
- Exploit odds: 0.2% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
- Severity: not scored yet.
- Fix: none linked yet, which raises it.
Details
- Published
- Last modified
- Exploit probability
- 0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days
- Record status
- Deferred
Is it in your code?
Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.
Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2025-40246.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2025-40246. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.
