In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ext4: fix corruption during on-line resize
We observed a corruption during on-line resize of a file system that is
larger than 16 TiB with 4k block size. With having more then 2^32 blocks
resize_inode is turned off by default by mke2fs. The issue can be
reproduced on a smaller file system for convenience by explicitly
turning off resize_inode. An on-line resize across an 8 GiB boundary (the
size of a meta block group in this setup) then leads to a corruption:
dev=/dev/ # should be >= 16 GiB
mkdir -p /corruption
/sbin/mke2fs -t ext4 -b 4096 -O ^resize_inode $dev $((2 * 221 - 215))
mount -t ext4 $dev /corruption
dd if=/dev/zero bs=4096 of=/corruption/test count=$((2*221 - 4*215))
sha1sum /corruption/test
# 79d2658b39dcfd77274e435b0934028adafaab11 /corruption/test
/sbin/resize2fs $dev $((2*2**21))
# drop page cache to force reload the block from disk
echo 1 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches
sha1sum /corruption/test
# 3c2abc63cbf1a94c9e6977e0fbd72cd832c4d5c3 /corruption/test
2^21 = 2^15*2^6 equals 8 GiB whereof 2^15 is the number of blocks per
block group and 2^6 are the number of block groups that make a meta
block group.
The last checksum might be different depending on how the file is laid
out across the physical blocks. The actual corruption occurs at physical
block 63*2^15 = 2064384 which would be the location of the backup of the
meta block group's block descriptor. During the on-line resize the file
system will be converted to meta_bg starting at s_first_meta_bg which is
2 in the example - meaning all block groups after 16 GiB. However, in
ext4_flex_group_add we might add block groups that are not part of the
first meta block group yet. In the reproducer we achieved this by
substracting the size of a whole block group from the point where the
meta block group would start. This must be considered when updating the
backup block group descriptors to follow the non-meta_bg layout. The fix
is to add a test whether the group to add is already part of the meta
block group or not.
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 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