In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
nilfs2: fix use-after-free bug of ns_writer on remount
If a nilfs2 filesystem is downgraded to read-only due to metadata
corruption on disk and is remounted read/write, or if emergency read-only
remount is performed, detaching a log writer and synchronizing the
filesystem can be done at the same time.
In these cases, use-after-free of the log writer (hereinafter
nilfs->ns_writer) can happen as shown in the scenario below:
Task1 Task2
-------------------------------- ------------------------------
nilfs_construct_segment
nilfs_segctor_sync
init_wait
init_waitqueue_entry
add_wait_queue
schedule
nilfs_remount (R/W remount case)
nilfs_attach_log_writer
nilfs_detach_log_writer
nilfs_segctor_destroy
kfree
finish_wait
_raw_spin_lock_irqsave
__raw_spin_lock_irqsave
do_raw_spin_lock
debug_spin_lock_before <-- use-after-free
While Task1 is sleeping, nilfs->ns_writer is freed by Task2. After Task1
waked up, Task1 accesses nilfs->ns_writer which is already freed. This
scenario diagram is based on the Shigeru Yoshida's post [1].
This patch fixes the issue by not detaching nilfs->ns_writer on remount so
that this UAF race doesn't happen. Along with this change, this patch
also inserts a few necessary read-only checks with superblock instance
where only the ns_writer pointer was used to check if the filesystem is
read-only.
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
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-27). 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