In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
liveupdate: luo_file: remember retrieve() status
LUO keeps track of successful retrieve attempts on a LUO file. It does so
to avoid multiple retrievals of the same file. Multiple retrievals cause
problems because once the file is retrieved, the serialized data
structures are likely freed and the file is likely in a very different
state from what the code expects.
The retrieve boolean in struct luo_file keeps track of this, and is passed
to the finish callback so it knows what work was already done and what it
has left to do.
All this works well when retrieve succeeds. When it fails,
luo_retrieve_file() returns the error immediately, without ever storing
anywhere that a retrieve was attempted or what its error code was. This
results in an errored LIVEUPDATE_SESSION_RETRIEVE_FD ioctl to userspace,
but nothing prevents it from trying this again.
The retry is problematic for much of the same reasons listed above. The
file is likely in a very different state than what the retrieve logic
normally expects, and it might even have freed some serialization data
structures. Attempting to access them or free them again is going to
break things.
For example, if memfd managed to restore 8 of its 10 folios, but fails on
the 9th, a subsequent retrieve attempt will try to call
kho_restore_folio() on the first folio again, and that will fail with a
warning since it is an invalid operation.
Apart from the retry, finish() also breaks. Since on failure the
retrieved bool in luo_file is never touched, the finish() call on session
close will tell the file handler that retrieve was never attempted, and it
will try to access or free the data structures that might not exist, much
in the same way as the retry attempt.
There is no sane way of attempting the retrieve again. Remember the error
retrieve returned and directly return it on a retry. Also pass this
status code to finish() so it can make the right decision on the work it
needs to do.
This is done by changing the bool to an integer. A value of 0 means
retrieve was never attempted, a positive value means it succeeded, and a
negative value means it failed and the error code is the value.
liveupdate: luo_file: remember retrieve() status
LUO keeps track of successful retrieve attempts on a LUO file. It does so
to avoid multiple retrievals of the same file. Multiple retrievals cause
problems because once the file is retrieved, the serialized data
structures are likely freed and the file is likely in a very different
state from what the code expects.
The retrieve boolean in struct luo_file keeps track of this, and is passed
to the finish callback so it knows what work was already done and what it
has left to do.
All this works well when retrieve succeeds. When it fails,
luo_retrieve_file() returns the error immediately, without ever storing
anywhere that a retrieve was attempted or what its error code was. This
results in an errored LIVEUPDATE_SESSION_RETRIEVE_FD ioctl to userspace,
but nothing prevents it from trying this again.
The retry is problematic for much of the same reasons listed above. The
file is likely in a very different state than what the retrieve logic
normally expects, and it might even have freed some serialization data
structures. Attempting to access them or free them again is going to
break things.
For example, if memfd managed to restore 8 of its 10 folios, but fails on
the 9th, a subsequent retrieve attempt will try to call
kho_restore_folio() on the first folio again, and that will fail with a
warning since it is an invalid operation.
Apart from the retry, finish() also breaks. Since on failure the
retrieved bool in luo_file is never touched, the finish() call on session
close will tell the file handler that retrieve was never attempted, and it
will try to access or free the data structures that might not exist, much
in the same way as the retry attempt.
There is no sane way of attempting the retrieve again. Remember the error
retrieve returned and directly return it on a retry. Also pass this
status code to finish() so it can make the right decision on the work it
needs to do.
This is done by changing the bool to an integer. A value of 0 means
retrieve was never attempted, a positive value means it succeeded, and a
negative value means it failed and the error code is the value.
Default status is the baseline for the product, each version can override it (e.g. patched versions marked unaffected).
| Vendor | Product | Default status | Versions | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Linux | Linux | unaffected |
|
|||||||||||||||
| Linux | Linux | affected |
|
No data.
No data.
OpenCVE Enrichment is a feature of OpenCVE that uses AI to automatically link vendors and products to CVEs. Learn more on GitHub.
No data.
Advisories
No advisories yet.
Fixes
Solution
No solution given by the vendor.
Workaround
No workaround given by the vendor.
References
History
Wed, 13 May 2026 17:15:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Weaknesses | CWE-416 |
Wed, 13 May 2026 15:15:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Description | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: liveupdate: luo_file: remember retrieve() status LUO keeps track of successful retrieve attempts on a LUO file. It does so to avoid multiple retrievals of the same file. Multiple retrievals cause problems because once the file is retrieved, the serialized data structures are likely freed and the file is likely in a very different state from what the code expects. The retrieve boolean in struct luo_file keeps track of this, and is passed to the finish callback so it knows what work was already done and what it has left to do. All this works well when retrieve succeeds. When it fails, luo_retrieve_file() returns the error immediately, without ever storing anywhere that a retrieve was attempted or what its error code was. This results in an errored LIVEUPDATE_SESSION_RETRIEVE_FD ioctl to userspace, but nothing prevents it from trying this again. The retry is problematic for much of the same reasons listed above. The file is likely in a very different state than what the retrieve logic normally expects, and it might even have freed some serialization data structures. Attempting to access them or free them again is going to break things. For example, if memfd managed to restore 8 of its 10 folios, but fails on the 9th, a subsequent retrieve attempt will try to call kho_restore_folio() on the first folio again, and that will fail with a warning since it is an invalid operation. Apart from the retry, finish() also breaks. Since on failure the retrieved bool in luo_file is never touched, the finish() call on session close will tell the file handler that retrieve was never attempted, and it will try to access or free the data structures that might not exist, much in the same way as the retry attempt. There is no sane way of attempting the retrieve again. Remember the error retrieve returned and directly return it on a retry. Also pass this status code to finish() so it can make the right decision on the work it needs to do. This is done by changing the bool to an integer. A value of 0 means retrieve was never attempted, a positive value means it succeeded, and a negative value means it failed and the error code is the value. | |
| Title | liveupdate: luo_file: remember retrieve() status | |
| First Time appeared |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| CPEs | cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* | |
| Vendors & Products |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| References |
|
Projects
Sign in to view the affected projects.
MITRE
Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published:
Updated: 2026-05-13T15:08:33.810Z
Reserved: 2026-05-01T14:12:56.012Z
Link: CVE-2026-43489
Vulnrichment
No data.
NVD
Status : Received
Published: 2026-05-13T16:16:52.230
Modified: 2026-05-13T16:16:52.230
Link: CVE-2026-43489
Redhat
No data.
OpenCVE Enrichment
Updated: 2026-05-13T17:00:14Z
Weaknesses