Independent & educational platform Not a government body. No link or affiliation with any government organisation. Made for learning only. Test only systems you own or are authorised to test. Become a Partner or Sponsor → Full disclaimer

CVE-2026-90199

high

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fs/ntfs3: reject out-of-range evcn in mi_enum_attr() In mi_enum_attr(), the start/end VCN…

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fs/ntfs3: reject out-of-range evcn in mi_enum_attr() In mi_enum_attr(), the start/end VCN validation for non-resident attributes is: if (svcn > evcn + 1) goto out; When evcn is U64_MAX the "evcn + 1" expression wraps to 0 and any svcn passes the check. For evcn values close to U64_MAX (but not equal to it) the right-hand side is still a meaningless near-wrap upper bound, so a malformed on-disk attribute with svcn == 0 and evcn near U64_MAX can pass mi_enum_attr() unrejected. VCN (virtual cluster number) is a cluster index, so any valid evcn is bounded by the volume's total cluster count, which ntfs3 holds in sbi->used.bitmap.nbits (set up in ntfs_init_from_boot() before any caller of mi_enum_attr() runs). Reject evcn values that fall outside this range. However, an empty non-resident attribute (no allocated clusters) is legitimately encoded with svcn == 0 and evcn == -1 (U64_MAX), e.g. via attr->nres.evcn = cpu_to_le64((u64)vcn - 1) with vcn == 0. That sentinel must keep passing, so exclude evcn == U64_MAX from the range check. The existing "svcn > evcn + 1" test still tolerates the sentinel ("0 > 0" is false) and continues to require svcn == 0 for it, while the range check rejects every other out-of-range evcn and thereby also defuses the "evcn + 1" wraparound. svcn does not need its own bound: once evcn < nbits, "svcn > evcn + 1" implies svcn <= nbits. [almaz.alexandrovich@paragon-software.com: fixed evcn check]

CVSS
7.8
7.8 (CVSS v3.1)
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Severity source: NVD CVSS v3.1 (416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67)
Timeline (UTC)
Published: 2026-09-17 17:17
Modified: 2026-10-19 09:19
NVD status: Received
Last synced 2 days ago
Verified against the source API 2026-10-27 06:54 UTC
Exploitation
Not listed in CISA KEV (as of last catalog sync)
Absence from KEV does not mean a CVE is not exploited. Exploitation status: unknown (no authoritative evidence in our sources).

Affected products

Not reported by the source (unknown — not "none").

Mitigation & advisories

No vendor advisory or patch reference tagged by NVD. Check the references below.

References

Data sources

NVD CVE API 2.0 — fetched 2026-10-27 06:54 UTC · record ↗

Learn the basics

Understanding CVEs and CVSS Scores