In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ext4: drop extent cache after doing PARTIAL_VALID1 zeroout
When splitting an unwritten extent in the middle and converting it to
initialized in ext4_split_extent() with the EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT and
EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flags set, it could leave a stale unwritten extent.
Assume we have an unwritten file and buffered write in the middle of it
without dioread_nolock enabled, it will allocate blocks as written
extent.
0 A B N
[UUUUUUUUUUUU] on-disk extent U: unwritten extent
[UUUUUUUUUUUU] extent status tree
[--DDDDDDDD--] D: valid data
|<- ->| ----> this range needs to be initialized
ext4_split_extent() first try to split this extent at B with
EXT4_EXT_DATA_PARTIAL_VALID1 and EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT flag set, but
ext4_split_extent_at() failed to split this extent due to temporary lack
of space. It zeroout B to N and leave the entire extent as unwritten.
0 A B N
[UUUUUUUUUUUU] on-disk extent
[UUUUUUUUUUUU] extent status tree
[--DDDDDDDDZZ] Z: zeroed data
ext4_split_extent() then try to split this extent at A with
EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flag set. This time, it split successfully and
leave an written extent from A to N.
0 A B N
[UUWWWWWWWWWW] on-disk extent W: written extent
[UUUUUUUUUUUU] extent status tree
[--DDDDDDDDZZ]
Finally ext4_map_create_blocks() only insert extent A to B to the extent
status tree, and leave an stale unwritten extent in the status tree.
0 A B N
[UUWWWWWWWWWW] on-disk extent W: written extent
[UUWWWWWWWWUU] extent status tree
[--DDDDDDDDZZ]
Fix this issue by always cached extent status entry after zeroing out
the second part.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-05). 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 every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (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)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). 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