In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ext4: fix warning in ext4_iomap_begin as race between bmap and write
We got issue as follows:
------------[ cut here ]------------
WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 9310 at fs/ext4/inode.c:3441 ext4_iomap_begin+0x182/0x5d0
RIP: 0010:ext4_iomap_begin+0x182/0x5d0
RSP: 0018:ffff88812460fa08 EFLAGS: 00010293
RAX: ffff88811f168000 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: ffffffff97793c12
RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000003
RBP: ffff88812c669160 R08: ffff88811f168000 R09: ffffed10258cd20f
R10: ffff88812c669077 R11: ffffed10258cd20e R12: 0000000000000001
R13: 00000000000000a4 R14: 000000000000000c R15: ffff88812c6691ee
FS: 00007fd0d6ff3740(0000) GS:ffff8883af180000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 00007fd0d6dda290 CR3: 0000000104a62000 CR4: 00000000000006e0
DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
Call Trace:
iomap_apply+0x119/0x570
iomap_bmap+0x124/0x150
ext4_bmap+0x14f/0x250
bmap+0x55/0x80
do_vfs_ioctl+0x952/0xbd0
__x64_sys_ioctl+0xc6/0x170
do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
Above issue may happen as follows:
bmap write
bmap
ext4_bmap
iomap_bmap
ext4_iomap_begin
ext4_file_write_iter
ext4_buffered_write_iter
generic_perform_write
ext4_da_write_begin
ext4_da_write_inline_data_begin
ext4_prepare_inline_data
ext4_create_inline_data
ext4_set_inode_flag(inode,
EXT4_INODE_INLINE_DATA);
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(ext4_has_inline_data(inode))) ->trigger bug_on
To solved above issue hold inode lock in ext4_bamp.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.0): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.0 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.0 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