← Back to KEV catalog

CVE-2026-31613

Exploitation: none CVSS 8.1 HIGH

CVSS base score: 8.1 (High) vendor CNA · v3.1

Score assigned by the vendor's own CVE Numbering Authority (CNA); CISA's Vulnrichment program adds a score only when the CNA omits one. Vulnrichment source record →

Vendor: Linux   Product: Linux

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: smb: client: fix OOB reads parsing symlink error response When a CREATE returns STATUS_STOPPED_ON_SYMLINK, smb2_check_message() returns success without any length validation, leaving the symlink parsers as the only defense against an untrusted server. symlink_data() walks SMB 3.1.1 error contexts with the loop test "p < end", but reads p->ErrorId at offset 4 and p->ErrorDataLength at offset 0. When the server-controlled ErrorDataLength advances p to within 1-7 bytes of end, the next iteration will read past it. When the matching context is found, sym->SymLinkErrorTag is read at offset 4 from p->ErrorContextData with no check that the symlink header itself fits. smb2_parse_symlink_response() then bounds-checks the substitute name using SMB2_SYMLINK_STRUCT_SIZE as the offset of PathBuffer from iov_base. That value is computed as sizeof(smb2_err_rsp) + sizeof(smb2_symlink_err_rsp), which is correct only when ErrorContextCount == 0. With at least one error context the symlink data sits 8 bytes deeper, and each skipped non-matching context shifts it further by 8 + ALIGN(ErrorDataLength, 8). The check is too short, allowing the substitute name read to run past iov_len. The out-of-bound heap bytes are UTF-16-decoded into the symlink target and returned to userspace via readlink(2). Fix this all up by making the loops test require the full context header to fit, rejecting sym if its header runs past end, and bound the substitute name against the actual position of sym->PathBuffer rather than a fixed offset. Because sub_offs and sub_len are 16bits, the pointer math will not overflow here with the new greater-than.

Research & News Coverage

No mentions found in monitored research blogs or news feeds.

Referenced in Advisories

DateAdvisoryIssuer
2026-10-22 ICSA-26-295-16: Siemens SIMATIC S7-1500 TM MFP CISA

Lifecycle Timeline

Each milestone comes from a different source, so gaps between them are gaps in what those sources publish, not evidence that nothing happened. EPSS history for this CVE holds 5 points from 2026-11-05, tracked daily from 2026-11-05; earlier points are weekly, which dates a spike to within a week. Peak probability 0.4% on 2026-11-05.

Published Applicability

Red Hat CSAF/VEX 22 affected · 1779 fixed · 42 not affected
OSV.dev (incl. GHSA) 15 affected · 14 fixed · 0 not affected
CVE List v5 (CNA container) 10 affected · 0 fixed · 8 not affected
CVE List v5 (ADP/Vulnrichment) 1 affected · 0 fixed · 0 not affected

Check whether a specific version is affected →

What each source publishes about which product versions carry this vulnerability, kept as written rather than merged. Absence here means no source has published applicability data, not that nothing is affected.

Detection & Exploitation

Scan
none published
Exploit / Pen Test
none published
Network IDS/IPS
none published
Host / SIEM
none published

Blind spot. No public detection — verify by version/patch. Nothing in the monitored scanner, IDS, SIEM or offensive-tool collections references this CVE, so exposure has to be established from asset inventory and patch level rather than from a signature.

Coverage across public collections only: Nuclei and OpenVAS NVT (scan); Snort and Suricata ET Open (network); Sigma and YARA (host/SIEM); Metasploit, Exploit-DB, public GitHub repositories and NVD exploit references (exploit). Absence here means nothing public was found, not that detection is impossible.
GitHub PoC repositories are collected automatically by PoC-in-GitHub (CC0) and filtered to repositories that are still online, contain code, and are starred or at least two weeks old. They are still not vetted: some are fakes and some are malware. Treat them as evidence that code was published, not as code to run.
NVD exploit references are links NVD's analysts tag as exploits; they confirm an exploit was referenced but carry no date. This product uses data from the NVD but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD.
OpenVAS coverage derives from the Greenbone Community Feed, made available under the Open Database License (ODbL) v1.0; its individual Vulnerability Tests are licensed GNU GPL v2.

No exploit-tool sightings recorded for this CVE.

Metasploit is dated by the first commit of the module file, Exploit-DB by its publication date, and GitHub repositories by their creation date. GitHub PoC repositories are filtered (still online, contain code, starred or at least two weeks old) but not vetted: some are fakes and some are malware, so they show that code was published, not that it works or is safe to run. Evidence tiers are explained on the About page.

Distribution Status

Debian · linux bookworm 6.1.176-1 trixie 6.12.94-1 forky 6.19.14-1 sid 6.19.14-1 scope: local

Where the distribution has shipped a fix, and in which version. Green means the release has resolved it, amber that it is still open. Data from the Debian Security Tracker, used under Debian's MIT / GPLv2+ terms. Debian is upstream of several other distributions, so a fix here often precedes theirs.

CISA Assessment (Vulnrichment / SSVC)

none
no
partial
—
8.1 HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H
2026-10-16

Federal Remediation Window (BOD 26-04)

No
no
partial control
If the asset isRemediate withinTable 1 row
Publicly exposed 60 days 8 of 16
Not publicly exposed Fix on system upgrade 16 of 16

BOD 26-04 replaced the single KEV deadline of BOD 22-01 with four inputs: whether the asset is publicly exposed, KEV status, whether exploitation is automatable, and technical impact. Exposure belongs to each agency's asset, not to the CVE, so both outcomes are shown. Automatable and technical impact come from the CISA assessment above. Days are calendar days; for KEV entries the clock starts on the date it was added, and otherwise when the agency identifies the vulnerability on an asset. Agencies make the final exposure call asset by asset, and may set shorter timelines.

External References