In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ext4: fix bug_on in ext4_writepages
we got issue as follows:
EXT4-fs error (device loop0): ext4_mb_generate_buddy:1141: group 0, block bitmap and bg descriptor inconsistent: 25 vs 31513 free cls
------------[ cut here ]------------
kernel BUG at fs/ext4/inode.c:2708!
invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN PTI
CPU: 2 PID: 2147 Comm: rep Not tainted 5.18.0-rc2-next-20220413+ #155
RIP: 0010:ext4_writepages+0x1977/0x1c10
RSP: 0018:ffff88811d3e7880 EFLAGS: 00010246
RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000001 RCX: ffff88811c098000
RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffff88811c098000 RDI: 0000000000000002
RBP: ffff888128140f50 R08: ffffffffb1ff6387 R09: 0000000000000000
R10: 0000000000000007 R11: ffffed10250281ea R12: 0000000000000001
R13: 00000000000000a4 R14: ffff88811d3e7bb8 R15: ffff888128141028
FS: 00007f443aed9740(0000) GS:ffff8883aef00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 0000000020007200 CR3: 000000011c2a4000 CR4: 00000000000006e0
DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
Call Trace:
do_writepages+0x130/0x3a0
filemap_fdatawrite_wbc+0x83/0xa0
filemap_flush+0xab/0xe0
ext4_alloc_da_blocks+0x51/0x120
__ext4_ioctl+0x1534/0x3210
__x64_sys_ioctl+0x12c/0x170
do_syscall_64+0x3b/0x90
It may happen as follows:
vfs_write
new_sync_write
ext4_file_write_iter
ext4_buffered_write_iter
generic_perform_write
ext4_da_write_begin
ext4_da_write_inline_data_begin -> If inline data size too
small will allocate block to write, then mapping will has
dirty page
ext4_da_convert_inline_data_to_extent ->clear EXT4_STATE_MAY_INLINE_DATA
do_vfs_ioctl
ioctl_preallocate
vfs_fallocate
ext4_fallocate
ext4_convert_inline_data
ext4_convert_inline_data_nolock
ext4_map_blocks -> fail will goto restore data
ext4_restore_inline_data
ext4_create_inline_data
ext4_write_inline_data
ext4_set_inode_state -> set inode EXT4_STATE_MAY_INLINE_DATA
__ext4_ioctl
ext4_alloc_da_blocks
filemap_flush
filemap_fdatawrite_wbc
do_writepages
ext4_writepages
if (ext4_has_inline_data(inode))
BUG_ON(ext4_test_inode_state(inode, EXT4_STATE_MAY_INLINE_DATA))
The root cause of this issue is we destory inline data until call
ext4_writepages under delay allocation mode. But there maybe already
convert from inline to extent. To solve this issue, we call
filemap_flush first..
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
- 0.3% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-25). 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, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: 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.
The score's inputs: 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