# CVE-2026-64296: exfat: bound uniname advance in exfat_find_dir_entry()

> A crafted exFAT directory structure can cause an out-of-bounds write in the Linux kernel, potentially leading to code execution or system crash.

- **Severity:** High 7.8 (`CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H`)
- **Exploited in the wild:** Not known
- **Login needed:** Any signed-in user
- **Attackable:** Local or same network only
- **Victim action needed:** Not needed
- **Fix available:** Yes
- **Published:** 25 Jul 2026
- **Updated:** 19 Oct 2026
- **Also known as:** BELL-CVE-2026-64296, DEBIAN-CVE-2026-64296, GHSA-6f82-hfhw-x2gc, ROOT-OS-DEBIAN-12-CVE-2026-64296, ROOT-OS-UBUNTU-2204-CVE-2026-64296, UBUNTU-CVE-2026-64296

## What is CVE-2026-64296?

CVE-2026-64296 is a high-severity memory corruption vulnerability in Linux kernel, published on 25 Jul 2026. It can only be exploited from the same machine or local network, with no action from the victim.

### Official description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

exfat: bound uniname advance in exfat_find_dir_entry()

In exfat_find_dir_entry(), each TYPE_EXTEND (file name) entry advances the
output pointer by a fixed amount while the loop guard only tracks the
accumulated name length:

	if (++order == 2)
		uniname = p_uniname->name;
	else
		uniname += EXFAT_FILE_NAME_LEN;
	len = exfat_extract_uni_name(ep, entry_uniname);
	name_len += len;
	unichar = *(uniname+len);
	*(uniname+len) = 0x0;

uniname grows by EXFAT_FILE_NAME_LEN (15) per name entry, but name_len
grows only by the actual extracted length, which is shorter when a name
fragment contains an early NUL.  The only guard is
`name_len >= MAX_NAME_LENGTH`, so a crafted directory with many short
name fragments lets uniname run far past the
p_uniname->name[MAX_NAME_LENGTH + 3] buffer while name_len stays small,
causing an out-of-bounds read and write at *(uniname+len).

The sibling extractor exfat_get_uniname_from_ext_entry() already stops
on a short fragment (the lockstep `len != EXFAT_FILE_NAME_LEN` guard
added in commit d42334578eba ("exfat: check if filename entries exceeds
max filename length")); exfat_find_dir_entry() never got the
equivalent.  Track the per-entry write offset as a count and reject a
fragment once the offset, or the offset plus the extracted length, would
exceed MAX_NAME_LENGTH, before forming the output pointer.

Weakness: CWE-787 (Out-of-bounds Write)

## Which versions are affected by CVE-2026-64296?

It affects 1 product.


Products: Linux kernel.

## How do I fix CVE-2026-64296?

Apply the vendor's patch.

## Is CVE-2026-64296 being exploited?

There is no known exploitation of CVE-2026-64296 in the wild and no public exploit code.

## Other vulnerabilities in Linux kernel

- [CVE-2026-53266](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-53266/): Linux Kernel Out-of-Bounds Write (high 8.8, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2013-6282](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2013-6282/): Linux Kernel Improper Input Validation (high 8.8, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2022-0185](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2022-0185/): Linux Kernel Heap-Based Buffer Overflow (high 8.4, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2013-2094](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2013-2094/): Linux Kernel Privilege Escalation (high 8.4, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2026-53362](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-53362/): Linux Kernel Unspecified (high 7.8, exploited in the wild)

## Fix prompt for AI coding agents

```text
Check this codebase for CVE-2026-64296 and fix it if it is affected.

What it is: CVE-2026-64296 is a high-severity memory corruption vulnerability in Linux kernel, published on 25 Jul 2026. It can only be exploited from the same machine or local network, with no action from the victim.
Exploitation: There is no known exploitation of CVE-2026-64296 in the wild and no public exploit code.

Affected product: Linux kernel. No package-level version data is available, so check the vendor advisory linked from the reference page.

Task:
1. Search the dependency manifests and lockfiles (for example package.json, package-lock.json, requirements.txt, poetry.lock, uv.lock, pom.xml, build.gradle, go.mod, Cargo.lock, Gemfile.lock) and any Dockerfiles for the affected packages, including transitive dependencies.
2. If an affected version is in use, upgrade it to the fixed version for its release line with the project's package manager, so the lockfile is regenerated. Prefer the smallest upgrade that fixes it.
3. If there is no fix, or the upgrade would break the build, do not guess: explain the risk and the safest workaround instead.
4. Run the tests and summarise what changed and why.
5. If nothing in the project is affected, say so and change nothing.

Reference: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-64296/ (Markdown: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-64296/index.md)
```

## Sources

- CVE record: https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64296
- NVD: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-64296
- OSV: https://osv.dev/vulnerability/CVE-2026-64296

---
From sbomify Insights: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-64296/
Summaries are generated and may contain mistakes; the official description above is the record.