In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ntfs: ->d_compare() must not block
... so don't use __getname() there. Switch it (and ntfs_d_hash(), while
we are at it) to kmalloc(PATH_MAX, GFP_NOWAIT). Yes, ntfs_d_hash()
almost certainly can do with smaller allocations, but let ntfs folks
deal with that - keep the allocation size as-is for now.
Stop abusing names_cachep in ntfs, period - various uses of that thing
in there have nothing to do with pathnames; just use k[mz]alloc() and
be done with that. For now let's keep sizes as-in, but AFAICS none of
the users actually want PATH_MAX.
Metrics
Affected Vendors & Products
References
History
Thu, 07 May 2026 04:45:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Weaknesses | CWE-399 |
Thu, 07 May 2026 00:15:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Weaknesses | CWE-1322 | |
| References |
|
Wed, 06 May 2026 14:45:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Weaknesses | CWE-399 |
Wed, 06 May 2026 12:15:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Description | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ntfs: ->d_compare() must not block ... so don't use __getname() there. Switch it (and ntfs_d_hash(), while we are at it) to kmalloc(PATH_MAX, GFP_NOWAIT). Yes, ntfs_d_hash() almost certainly can do with smaller allocations, but let ntfs folks deal with that - keep the allocation size as-is for now. Stop abusing names_cachep in ntfs, period - various uses of that thing in there have nothing to do with pathnames; just use k[mz]alloc() and be done with that. For now let's keep sizes as-in, but AFAICS none of the users actually want PATH_MAX. | |
| Title | ntfs: ->d_compare() must not block | |
| First Time appeared |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| CPEs | cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* | |
| Vendors & Products |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| References |
|
Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published: 2026-05-06T11:28:37.602Z
Updated: 2026-05-06T11:28:37.602Z
Reserved: 2026-05-01T14:12:55.996Z
Link: CVE-2026-43245
No data.
Status : Awaiting Analysis
Published: 2026-05-06T12:16:44.997
Modified: 2026-05-06T13:07:51.607
Link: CVE-2026-43245
ReportizFlow