CVE-2026-89768
CVE CVE-2026-89768EUVD EUVD-2026-76680Veröffentlicht 2026-09-11T19:47:08.000Z
Was das Advisory beschreibt
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fs: fix user path of nested backing files backing_file_open() derives the path to be stored in the new backing file from user_file->f_path. This is incorrect when user_file itself is a backing file, which is the case for nested stacking filesystems, e.g. overlayfs mounts where the lowerdir of one overlayfs is the merged directory of another. Since commit def3ae83da02 ("fs: store real path instead of fake path in backing file f_path") the f_path of a backing file holds the real path of the intermediate layer, not the path that the user opened. Commit 924577e4f6ca ("ovl: Fix nested backing file paths") fixed this for such configurations by passing file_user_path() from ovl_open_realfile(). However, commit 6af36aeb147a ("lsm: add backing_file LSM hooks") changed the first argument of backing_file_open() from the user path back to the user file and derived the path from user_file->f_path again, silently re-introducing the problem. As a result, files mapped through a nested overlayfs show the wrong path in /proc/<pid>/maps and in perf/ftrace mmap records. For example, with two nested overlayfs mounts: mkdir -p /ovl/{lower,upper,work,merged} /ovl/nested echo hello > /ovl/lower/foo mount -t overlay overlay \ -o lowerdir=/ovl/lower,upperdir=/ovl/upper,workdir=/ovl/work \ /ovl/merged # at least two lowerdirs are needed when upperdir is nonexistent mount -t overlay overlay \ -o lowerdir=/ovl/merged:/ovl/lower /ovl/nested mapping /ovl/nested/foo shows a disconnected path instead of the user path: # readlink /proc/self/fd/3 /ovl/nested/foo # grep foo /proc/self/maps 7f6e2c100000-7f6e2c101000 r--s 00000000 00:24 15813027 /foo The bogus path is derived from the f_path of the intermediate backing file, whose mount is a private clone that d_path() cannot resolve. Fix this by using file_user_path(), which returns the outermost user-visible path for backing files and falls back to &user_file->f_path for regular files. This restores the behavior of commit 924577e4f6ca ("ovl: Fix nested backing file paths") for overlayfs and also fixes the same problem for the other backing_file_open() callers, fuse passthrough and erofs ishare, when their user file is itself a backing file. backing_tmpfile_open() has the same pattern but is not affected: it is only called by ovl_create_tmpfile() for the upper layer, and another overlayfs is rejected as upperdir by the DCACHE_OP_REAL check in ovl_mount_dir_check(), so its user_file can never be a backing file.
Quelle: EUVD (ENISA), im Wortlaut der Meldung.
Produkte, die das Advisory nennt
Diese Angaben stammen aus der Meldung selbst, nicht aus einer Prüfung durch uns.
- Linux — Linux 41c5b269af8b1f0bffcab7766a793f294ae6764e; 6af36aeb147a06dea47c49859cd6ca5659aeb987 <a35cc21355734e1acb89973d9be90ca8e4c3ed2f; patch: 7.2.4; 6.12.95 <6.12.109; patch: 6.18.50; 5dfcb15974e7d0f96aca278dd9f1b85df91523ef <c03114634d342648bd34910aa8fb88007e92cc3c; patch: 6.12.109; 5b6aa9a843205da92d860e5011a7b29062a76b8f <88c927a63dc717b6d46b20fe13ea713916e49089; 7.1; 6.6.144 <6.7; 6.18.38 <6.18.50; patch: 7.3-rc1; 7.0.4 <7.1; 6af36aeb147a06dea47c49859cd6ca5659aeb987 <f2381b546e7e6a35c9fcee0d0ccb6c042a9aeb5d; 27e795afba0018b0ea9460dbad4bd706d1ba5ee0; patch: 0
Die genannten Versionen sind die Angabe der Meldung. Patchlage vergleicht keine Versionsnummern und leitet aus ihnen keine Aussage ab — welche Version installiert ist, muss ein Mensch nachsehen.
Im Produktkatalog geführt
Für diese Produkte kann ein Bestand in Patchlage erfasst werden. Ein Advisory dazu erscheint am Morgen danach im Lagebericht.
- Linux — Linux
Betrifft das einen Ihrer Kundenbestände?
Diese Seite kann die Frage nicht beantworten — sie kennt Ihren Bestand nicht. Wer seine Umgebungen erfasst hat, bekommt die Antwort am Morgen nach der Veröffentlichung, zusammen mit einem Absatz, den er unverändert an den Kunden weitergeben kann.
28 Tage testenPatchlage meldet Treffer und Verdachtsfälle. Zu allem anderen sagt dieses System nichts — weder diese Seite noch der Lagebericht behauptet je, dass ein Bestand sicher ist.