platform/x86: panasonic-laptop: Fix sentinel write past pcc->sinf[]
acpi_pcc_retrieve_biosdata() rejects SINF packages only when
pcc->num_sifr is strictly less than hkey->package.count, then
unconditionally writes a trailing sentinel at
pcc->sinf[hkey->package.count]. But pcc->sinf[] is allocated with
exactly pcc->num_sifr elements (valid indices 0..num_sifr-1), so that
write needs num_sifr strictly greater than package.count to stay in
bounds -- num_sifr == package.count passes the existing check but
still overflows by one element.
This is exactly the case probe()'s existing num_sifr++ workaround
("Some DSDT-s have an off-by-one bug where the SINF package count is
one higher than the SQTY reported value") is written to accommodate:
when a DSDT's SINF package count equals SQTY+1, the workaround makes
num_sifr equal to package.count, which is precisely the boundary that
overflows here. Found via UBSan (array-index-out-of-bounds) on
hardware where HKEY.SQTY returns 37 and HKEY.SINF()'s package has 38
elements: num_sifr becomes 38 after the += 1 workaround, the loop
correctly fills indices 0..37, and the sentinel write then targets
index 38, one past the end -- a silent 4-byte heap overflow on kernels
without CONFIG_UBSAN.
Tightening the rejection check to num_sifr <= package.count would
avoid the overflow but breaks probe() entirely on exactly this
hardware, since num_sifr == package.count is the case the off-by-one
workaround exists to support. Nothing else in the driver reads this
sentinel value back, so simply skip the write when there is no room
for it instead.
Analysis and contextual insights are available on OpenCVE Cloud.
No vendor fix or workaround currently provided.
Additional remediation guidance may be available on OpenCVE Cloud.
Tracking
Sign in to view the affected projects.
No advisories yet.
Sat, 12 Sep 2026 00:15:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Weaknesses | CWE-787 | |
| References |
| |
| Metrics |
threat_severity
|
cvssV3_1
|
Fri, 11 Sep 2026 23:45:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Description | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: platform/x86: panasonic-laptop: Fix sentinel write past pcc->sinf[] acpi_pcc_retrieve_biosdata() rejects SINF packages only when pcc->num_sifr is strictly less than hkey->package.count, then unconditionally writes a trailing sentinel at pcc->sinf[hkey->package.count]. But pcc->sinf[] is allocated with exactly pcc->num_sifr elements (valid indices 0..num_sifr-1), so that write needs num_sifr strictly greater than package.count to stay in bounds -- num_sifr == package.count passes the existing check but still overflows by one element. This is exactly the case probe()'s existing num_sifr++ workaround ("Some DSDT-s have an off-by-one bug where the SINF package count is one higher than the SQTY reported value") is written to accommodate: when a DSDT's SINF package count equals SQTY+1, the workaround makes num_sifr equal to package.count, which is precisely the boundary that overflows here. Found via UBSan (array-index-out-of-bounds) on hardware where HKEY.SQTY returns 37 and HKEY.SINF()'s package has 38 elements: num_sifr becomes 38 after the += 1 workaround, the loop correctly fills indices 0..37, and the sentinel write then targets index 38, one past the end -- a silent 4-byte heap overflow on kernels without CONFIG_UBSAN. Tightening the rejection check to num_sifr <= package.count would avoid the overflow but breaks probe() entirely on exactly this hardware, since num_sifr == package.count is the case the off-by-one workaround exists to support. Nothing else in the driver reads this sentinel value back, so simply skip the write when there is no room for it instead. | |
| Title | platform/x86: panasonic-laptop: Fix sentinel write past pcc->sinf[] | |
| First Time appeared |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| CPEs | cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* | |
| Vendors & Products |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| References |
|
Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published:
Updated: 2026-09-11T19:43:06.732Z
Reserved: 2026-09-11T19:38:34.702Z
Link: CVE-2026-89436
No data.
Status : Received
Published: 2026-09-11T20:19:23.847
Modified: 2026-09-11T20:19:23.847
Link: CVE-2026-89436
OpenCVE Enrichment
No data.