Vulnerability Database

401,687

Total vulnerabilities in the database

CVE-2026-53041 — linux / linux_kernel

Out-of-bounds Write

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

ocfs2: fix listxattr handling when the buffer is full

[BUG] If an OCFS2 inode has both inline and block-based xattrs, listxattr() can return a size larger than the caller's buffer when the inline names consume that buffer exactly.

kernel BUG at mm/usercopy.c:102! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN NOPTI RIP: 0010:usercopy_abort+0xb7/0xd0 mm/usercopy.c:102 Call Trace: __check_heap_object+0xe3/0x120 mm/slub.c:8243 check_heap_object mm/usercopy.c:196 [inline] __check_object_size mm/usercopy.c:250 [inline] __check_object_size+0x5c5/0x780 mm/usercopy.c:215 check_object_size include/linux/ucopysize.h:22 [inline] check_copy_size include/linux/ucopysize.h:59 [inline] copy_to_user include/linux/uaccess.h:219 [inline] listxattr+0xb0/0x170 fs/xattr.c:926 filename_listxattr fs/xattr.c:958 [inline] path_listxattrat+0x137/0x320 fs/xattr.c:988 __do_sys_listxattr fs/xattr.c:1001 [inline] __se_sys_listxattr fs/xattr.c:998 [inline] __x64_sys_listxattr+0x7f/0xd0 fs/xattr.c:998 ...

[CAUSE] Commit 936b8834366e ("ocfs2: Refactor xattr list and remove ocfs2_xattr_handler().") replaced the old per-handler list accounting with ocfs2_xattr_list_entry(), but it kept using size == 0 to detect probe mode.

That assumption stops being true once ocfs2_listxattr() finishes the inline-xattr pass. If the inline names fill the caller buffer exactly, the block-xattr pass runs with a non-NULL buffer and a remaining size of zero. ocfs2_xattr_list_entry() then skips the bounds check, keeps counting block names, and returns a positive size larger than the supplied buffer.

[FIX] Detect probe mode by testing whether the destination buffer pointer is NULL instead of whether the remaining size is zero.

That restores the pre-refactor behavior and matches the OCFS2 getxattr helpers. Once the remaining buffer reaches zero while more names are left, the block-xattr pass now returns -ERANGE instead of reporting a size larger than the allocated list buffer.

  • Published: Jun 24, 2026
  • Updated: Oct 17, 2026
  • CVE: CVE-2026-53041
  • Severity: High
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: High
  • Score: 7.1
  • AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H

CWEs:

Is CVE-2026-53041 exposed on your perimeter?

A vulnerability database tells you what is broken. Attack surface management tells you where it is running: it discovers your internet-facing assets and flags the ones affected by issues like this one.

What is attack surface management? →

Frequently Asked Questions

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.