Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
mtd: spi-nor: swp: Improve locking user experience
In the case of the first block being locked (or the few first blocks),
if the user want to fully unlock the device it has two possibilities:
- either it asks to unlock the entire device, and this works;
- or it asks to unlock just the block(s) that are currently locked,
which fails.
It fails because the conditions "can_be_top" and "can_be_bottom" are
true. Indeed, in this case, we unlock everything, so the TB bit does not
matter. However in the current implementation, use_top would be true (as
this is the favourite option) and lock_len, which in practice should be
reduced down to 0, is set to "nor->params->size - (ofs + len)" which is
a positive number. This is wrong.
An easy way is to simply add an extra condition. In the unlock() path,
if we can achieve the same result from both sides, it means we unlock
everything and lock_len must simply be 0. A comment is added to clarify
that logic.
mtd: spi-nor: swp: Improve locking user experience
In the case of the first block being locked (or the few first blocks),
if the user want to fully unlock the device it has two possibilities:
- either it asks to unlock the entire device, and this works;
- or it asks to unlock just the block(s) that are currently locked,
which fails.
It fails because the conditions "can_be_top" and "can_be_bottom" are
true. Indeed, in this case, we unlock everything, so the TB bit does not
matter. However in the current implementation, use_top would be true (as
this is the favourite option) and lock_len, which in practice should be
reduced down to 0, is set to "nor->params->size - (ofs + len)" which is
a positive number. This is wrong.
An easy way is to simply add an extra condition. In the unlock() path,
if we can achieve the same result from both sides, it means we unlock
everything and lock_len must simply be 0. A comment is added to clarify
that logic.
Published:
2026-08-15
Score:
n/a
EPSS:
n/a
KEV:
No
Impact:
n/a
Action:
n/a
Analysis
No analysis available yet.
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.
No data available yet.
Remediation
No remediation available yet.
Tracking
Sign in to view the affected projects.
Advisories
No advisories yet.
References
History
Sat, 15 Aug 2026 06:00:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Description | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mtd: spi-nor: swp: Improve locking user experience In the case of the first block being locked (or the few first blocks), if the user want to fully unlock the device it has two possibilities: - either it asks to unlock the entire device, and this works; - or it asks to unlock just the block(s) that are currently locked, which fails. It fails because the conditions "can_be_top" and "can_be_bottom" are true. Indeed, in this case, we unlock everything, so the TB bit does not matter. However in the current implementation, use_top would be true (as this is the favourite option) and lock_len, which in practice should be reduced down to 0, is set to "nor->params->size - (ofs + len)" which is a positive number. This is wrong. An easy way is to simply add an extra condition. In the unlock() path, if we can achieve the same result from both sides, it means we unlock everything and lock_len must simply be 0. A comment is added to clarify that logic. | |
| Title | mtd: spi-nor: swp: Improve locking user experience | |
| First Time appeared |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| CPEs | cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* | |
| Vendors & Products |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| References |
|
|
MITRE
Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published:
Updated: 2026-08-15T05:53:25.236Z
Reserved: 2026-08-09T03:40:39.909Z
Link: CVE-2026-72155
Vulnrichment
No data.
NVD
Status : Received
Published: 2026-08-15T06:21:33.250
Modified: 2026-08-15T06:21:33.250
Link: CVE-2026-72155
Redhat
No data.
OpenCVE Enrichment
No data.
Weaknesses
No weakness.