In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ext4: don't set EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_CONVERT when splitting before submitting I/O
When allocating blocks during within-EOF DIO and writeback with
dioread_nolock enabled, EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_PRE_IO was set to split an
existing large unwritten extent. However, EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_CONVERT was
set when calling ext4_split_convert_extents(), which may potentially
result in stale data issues.
Assume we have an unwritten extent, and then DIO writes the second half.
[UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU] on-disk extent U: unwritten extent
[UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU] extent status tree
|<- ->| ----> dio write this range
First, ext4_iomap_alloc() call ext4_map_blocks() with
EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_PRE_IO, EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_UNWRIT_EXT and
EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_CREATE flags set. ext4_map_blocks() find this extent and
call ext4_split_convert_extents() with EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_CONVERT and the
above flags set.
Then, ext4_split_convert_extents() calls ext4_split_extent() with
EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT, EXT4_EXT_MARK_UNWRIT2 and EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2
flags set, and it calls ext4_split_extent_at() to split the second half
with EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2, EXT4_EXT_MARK_UNWRIT1, EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT
and EXT4_EXT_MARK_UNWRIT2 flags set. However, ext4_split_extent_at()
failed to insert extent since a temporary lack -ENOSPC. It zeroes out
the first half but convert the entire on-disk extent to written since
the EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flag set, but left the second half as unwritten
in the extent status tree.
[0000000000SSSSSS] data S: stale data, 0: zeroed
[WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW] on-disk extent W: written extent
[WWWWWWWWWWUUUUUU] extent status tree
Finally, if the DIO failed to write data to the disk, the stale data in
the second half will be exposed once the cached extent entry is gone.
Fix this issue by not passing EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_CONVERT when splitting
an unwritten extent before submitting I/O, and make
ext4_split_convert_extents() to zero out the entire extent range
to zero for this case, and also mark the extent in the extent status
tree for consistency.
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
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-06). 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