linux-kernel - Re: CVE-2025-38495: HID: core: ensure the allocated report buffer can contain the reserved report ID

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2025093001-petted-boney-29c2@gregkh>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2025 12:59:03 +0200
From: "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Siddh Raman Pant <siddh.raman.pant@...cle.com>
Cc: "cve@...nel.org" <cve@...nel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: CVE-2025-38495: HID: core: ensure the allocated report buffer
 can contain the reserved report ID

On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 10:54:06AM +0000, Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30 2025 at 16:19:44 +0530, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
> wrote:
> > What git id is that?
> 
> 0d0777ccaa2d46609d05b66ba0096802a2746193

That commit id on its own does not "fix" anything that we can see, which
is why it was not given a CVE.

> > And this commit on its own fixes a problem, so it should be a separate
> > CVE, right?
> 
> The reservation of 1st byte happens in the next commit.
> 
> Not sure why the change was broken up into two.

Then the second change is the one that gets the CVE.  Any "previous"
commits in a series that were preparing for the real fix are not called
out.  As each CVE entry says, do NOT cherry-pick, but rather always take
all of the commits in the stable release.

thanks,

greg k-h