In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
fs/ntfs3: Fix null-ptr-deref on inode->i_op in ntfs_lookup()
Syzbot reported a null-ptr-deref bug:
ntfs3: loop0: Different NTFS' sector size (1024) and media sector size
(512)
ntfs3: loop0: Mark volume as dirty due to NTFS errors
general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address
0xdffffc0000000001: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN
KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000008-0x000000000000000f]
RIP: 0010:d_flags_for_inode fs/dcache.c:1980 [inline]
RIP: 0010:__d_add+0x5ce/0x800 fs/dcache.c:2796
Call Trace:
d_splice_alias+0x122/0x3b0 fs/dcache.c:3191
lookup_open fs/namei.c:3391 [inline]
open_last_lookups fs/namei.c:3481 [inline]
path_openat+0x10e6/0x2df0 fs/namei.c:3688
do_filp_open+0x264/0x4f0 fs/namei.c:3718
do_sys_openat2+0x124/0x4e0 fs/open.c:1310
do_sys_open fs/open.c:1326 [inline]
__do_sys_open fs/open.c:1334 [inline]
__se_sys_open fs/open.c:1330 [inline]
__x64_sys_open+0x221/0x270 fs/open.c:1330
do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline]
do_syscall_64+0x3d/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd
If the MFT record of ntfs inode is not a base record, inode->i_op can be
NULL. And a null-ptr-deref may happen:
ntfs_lookup()
dir_search_u() # inode->i_op is set to NULL
d_splice_alias()
__d_add()
d_flags_for_inode() # inode->i_op->get_link null-ptr-deref
Fix this by adding a Check on inode->i_op before calling the
d_splice_alias() function.
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 2026-10-25). 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 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