GHSA-CF4P-6XCV-JCRJ
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-10-04 18:31 – Updated: 2026-02-12 18:30In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
HID: hyperv: avoid struct memcpy overrun warning
A previous patch addressed the fortified memcpy warning for most builds, but I still see this one with gcc-9:
In file included from include/linux/string.h:254, from drivers/hid/hid-hyperv.c:8: In function 'fortify_memcpy_chk', inlined from 'mousevsc_on_receive' at drivers/hid/hid-hyperv.c:272:3: include/linux/fortify-string.h:583:4: error: call to '__write_overflow_field' declared with attribute warning: detected write beyond size of field (1st parameter); maybe use struct_group()? [-Werror=attribute-warning] 583 | __write_overflow_field(p_size_field, size); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My guess is that the WARN_ON() itself is what confuses gcc, so it no longer sees that there is a correct range check. Rework the code in a way that helps readability and avoids the warning.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-53553"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-10-04T16:15:50Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nHID: hyperv: avoid struct memcpy overrun warning\n\nA previous patch addressed the fortified memcpy warning for most\nbuilds, but I still see this one with gcc-9:\n\nIn file included from include/linux/string.h:254,\n from drivers/hid/hid-hyperv.c:8:\nIn function \u0027fortify_memcpy_chk\u0027,\n inlined from \u0027mousevsc_on_receive\u0027 at drivers/hid/hid-hyperv.c:272:3:\ninclude/linux/fortify-string.h:583:4: error: call to \u0027__write_overflow_field\u0027 declared with attribute warning: detected write beyond size of field (1st parameter); maybe use struct_group()? [-Werror=attribute-warning]\n 583 | __write_overflow_field(p_size_field, size);\n | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n\nMy guess is that the WARN_ON() itself is what confuses gcc, so it no\nlonger sees that there is a correct range check. Rework the code in a\nway that helps readability and avoids the warning.",
"id": "GHSA-cf4p-6xcv-jcrj",
"modified": "2026-02-12T18:30:18Z",
"published": "2025-10-04T18:31:15Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-53553"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/5f151364b1da6bd217632fd4ee8cc24eaf66a497"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a7902cc5f5b9c95997017c8e309da760fb1deb6e"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.