In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
erofs: fix inline data read failure for ztailpacking pclusters
Compressed folios for ztailpacking pclusters must be valid before adding
these pclusters to I/O chains. Otherwise, z_erofs_decompress_pcluster()
may assume they are already valid and then trigger a NULL pointer
dereference.
It is somewhat hard to reproduce because the inline data is in the same
block as the tail of the compressed indexes, which are usually read just
before. However, it may still happen if a fatal signal arrives while
read_mapping_folio() is running, as shown below:
erofs: (device dm-1): z_erofs_pcluster_begin: failed to get inline data -4
Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000000000000008
...
pc : z_erofs_decompress_queue+0x4c8/0xa14
lr : z_erofs_decompress_queue+0x160/0xa14
sp : ffffffc08b3eb3a0
x29: ffffffc08b3eb570 x28: ffffffc08b3eb418 x27: 0000000000001000
x26: ffffff8086ebdbb8 x25: ffffff8086ebdbb8 x24: 0000000000000001
x23: 0000000000000008 x22: 00000000fffffffb x21: dead000000000700
x20: 00000000000015e7 x19: ffffff808babb400 x18: ffffffc089edc098
x17: 00000000c006287d x16: 00000000c006287d x15: 0000000000000004
x14: ffffff80ba8f8000 x13: 0000000000000004 x12: 00000006589a77c9
x11: 0000000000000015 x10: 0000000000000000 x9 : 0000000000000000
x8 : 0000000000000000 x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : 000000000000003f
x5 : 0000000000000040 x4 : ffffffffffffffe0 x3 : 0000000000000020
x2 : 0000000000000008 x1 : 0000000000000000 x0 : 0000000000000000
Call trace:
z_erofs_decompress_queue+0x4c8/0xa14
z_erofs_runqueue+0x908/0x97c
z_erofs_read_folio+0x128/0x228
filemap_read_folio+0x68/0x128
filemap_get_pages+0x44c/0x8b4
filemap_read+0x12c/0x5b8
generic_file_read_iter+0x4c/0x15c
do_iter_readv_writev+0x188/0x1e0
vfs_iter_read+0xac/0x1a4
backing_file_read_iter+0x170/0x34c
ovl_read_iter+0xf0/0x140
vfs_read+0x28c/0x344
ksys_read+0x80/0xf0
__arm64_sys_read+0x24/0x34
invoke_syscall+0x60/0x114
el0_svc_common+0x88/0xe4
do_el0_svc+0x24/0x30
el0_svc+0x40/0xa8
el0t_64_sync_handler+0x70/0xbc
el0t_64_sync+0x1bc/0x1c0
Fix this by reading the inline data before allocating and adding
the pclusters to the I/O chains.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.1 HIGHCVSS-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 2026-10-17). 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