CVE-2026-64046
Beschrijving NL
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: tls: prevent chain-after-chain in plain text SG
Sashiko points out that if end = 0 (start != 0) the current
code will create a chain link to content type right after
the wrap link:
This would create a chain where the wrap link points directly
to another chain link. The scatterlist API sg_next iterator
does not recursively resolve consecutive chain links. meaning this is illegal input to crypto. The wrapping link is unnecessary if end = 0. end is the entry after
the last one used so end = 0 means there's nothing pushed after
the wrap:
end start i
v v v
[ ]...[ ][ d ][ d ][ d ][ d ][rsv for wrap]
Skip the wrapping in this case. TLS 1.3 can use the "wrapping slot" for it's chaining if end = 0. This avoids the chain-after-chain. Move the wrap chaining before marking END and chaining off content
type, that feels like more logical ordering to me, but should not
matter from functional perspective.
Origineel (Engels) tonen
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
net: tls: prevent chain-after-chain in plain text SG
Sashiko points out that if end = 0 (start != 0) the current
code will create a chain link to content type right after
the wrap link:
This would create a chain where the wrap link points directly
to another chain link. The scatterlist API sg_next iterator
does not recursively resolve consecutive chain links.
meaning this is illegal input to crypto.
The wrapping link is unnecessary if end = 0. end is the entry after
the last one used so end = 0 means there's nothing pushed after
the wrap:
end start i
v v v
[ ]...[ ][ d ][ d ][ d ][ d ][rsv for wrap]
Skip the wrapping in this case.
TLS 1.3 can use the "wrapping slot" for it's chaining if end = 0.
This avoids the chain-after-chain.
Move the wrap chaining before marking END and chaining off content
type, that feels like more logical ordering to me, but should not
matter from functional perspective.