In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
f2fs: fix use-after-free of sbi in f2fs_compress_write_end_io()
In f2fs_compress_write_end_io(), dec_page_count(sbi, type) can bring
the F2FS_WB_CP_DATA counter to zero, unblocking
f2fs_wait_on_all_pages() in f2fs_put_super() on a concurrent unmount
CPU. The unmount path then proceeds to call
f2fs_destroy_page_array_cache(sbi), which destroys
sbi->page_array_slab via kmem_cache_destroy(), and eventually
kfree(sbi). Meanwhile, the bio completion callback is still executing:
when it reaches page_array_free(sbi, ...), it dereferences
sbi->page_array_slab — a destroyed slab cache — to call
kmem_cache_free(), causing a use-after-free.
This is the same class of bug as CVE-2026-23234 (which fixed the
equivalent race in f2fs_write_end_io() in data.c), but in the
compressed writeback completion path that was not covered by that fix.
Fix this by moving dec_page_count() to after page_array_free(), so
that all sbi accesses complete before the counter decrement that can
unblock unmount. For non-last folios (where atomic_dec_return on
cic->pending_pages is nonzero), dec_page_count is called immediately
before returning — page_array_free is not reached on this path, so
there is no post-decrement sbi access. For the last folio,
page_array_free runs while the F2FS_WB_CP_DATA counter is still
nonzero (this folio has not yet decremented it), keeping sbi alive,
and dec_page_count runs as the final operation.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.8 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it