In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
fs: Prevent file descriptor table allocations exceeding INT_MAX
When sysctl_nr_open is set to a very high value (for example, 1073741816 as set by systemd), processes attempting to use file descriptors near the limit can trigger massive memory allocation attempts that exceed INT_MAX, resulting in a WARNING in mm/slub.c:
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 44 at mm/slub.c:5027 __kvmalloc_node_noprof+0x21a/0x288
This happens because kvmalloc_array() and kvmalloc() check if the requested size exceeds INT_MAX and emit a warning when the allocation is not flagged with __GFP_NOWARN.
Specifically, when nr_open is set to 1073741816 (0x3ffffff8) and a process calls dup2(oldfd, 1073741880), the kernel attempts to allocate:
Reproducer:
Set /proc/sys/fs/nr_open to 1073741816:
Run a program that uses a high file descriptor: #include <unistd.h> #include <sys/resource.h>
int main() { struct rlimit rlim = {1073741824, 1073741824}; setrlimit(RLIMIT_NOFILE, &rlim); dup2(2, 1073741880); // Triggers the warning return 0; }
Observe WARNING in dmesg at mm/slub.c:5027
systemd commit a8b627a introduced automatic bumping of fs.nr_open to the maximum possible value. The rationale was that systems with memory control groups (memcg) no longer need separate file descriptor limits since memory is properly accounted. However, this change overlooked that:
systemd's algorithm starts with INT_MAX and keeps halving the value until the kernel accepts it. On most systems, this results in nr_open being set to 1073741816 (0x3ffffff8), which is just under 1GB of file descriptors.
While processes rarely use file descriptors near this limit in normal operation, certain selftests (like tools/testing/selftests/core/unshare_test.c) and programs that test file descriptor limits can trigger this issue.
Fix this by adding a check in alloc_fdtable() to ensure the requested allocation size does not exceed INT_MAX. This causes the operation to fail with -EMFILE instead of triggering a kernel warning and avoids the impractical >8GB memory allocation request.
| Software | From | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| linux / linux_kernel | 2.6.25 | 5.4.297 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.5 | 5.10.241 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.11 | 5.15.190 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.16 | 6.1.149 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.2 | 6.6.103 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.7 | 6.12.43 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.13 | 6.15.11 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.16 | 6.16.2 |
| debian / debian_linux | 11.0 | 11.0.x |
A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.
CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.
A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.
Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.
Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.
SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.