In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
jffs2: prevent xattr node from overflowing the eraseblock
Add a check to make sure that the requested xattr node size is no larger
than the eraseblock minus the cleanmarker.
Unlike the usual inode nodes, the xattr nodes aren't split into parts
and spread across multiple eraseblocks, which means that a xattr node
must not occupy more than one eraseblock. If the requested xattr value is
too large, the xattr node can spill onto the next eraseblock, overwriting
the nodes and causing errors such as:
jffs2: argh. node added in wrong place at 0x0000b050(2)
jffs2: nextblock 0x0000a000, expected at 0000b00c
jffs2: error: (823) do_verify_xattr_datum: node CRC failed at 0x01e050,
read=0xfc892c93, calc=0x000000
jffs2: notice: (823) jffs2_get_inode_nodes: Node header CRC failed
at 0x01e00c. {848f,2fc4,0fef511f,59a3d171}
jffs2: Node at 0x0000000c with length 0x00001044 would run over the
end of the erase block
jffs2: Perhaps the file system was created with the wrong erase size?
jffs2: jffs2_scan_eraseblock(): Magic bitmask 0x1985 not found
at 0x00000010: 0x1044 instead
This breaks the filesystem and can lead to KASAN crashes such as:
BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in jffs2_sum_add_kvec+0x125e/0x15d0
Read of size 4 at addr ffff88802c31e914 by task repro/830
CPU: 0 PID: 830 Comm: repro Not tainted 6.9.0-rc3+ #1
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996),
BIOS Arch Linux 1.16.3-1-1 04/01/2014
Call Trace:
dump_stack_lvl+0xc6/0x120
print_report+0xc4/0x620
? __virt_addr_valid+0x308/0x5b0
kasan_report+0xc1/0xf0
? jffs2_sum_add_kvec+0x125e/0x15d0
? jffs2_sum_add_kvec+0x125e/0x15d0
jffs2_sum_add_kvec+0x125e/0x15d0
jffs2_flash_direct_writev+0xa8/0xd0
jffs2_flash_writev+0x9c9/0xef0
? __x64_sys_setxattr+0xc4/0x160
? do_syscall_64+0x69/0x140
? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
[...]
Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with Syzkaller.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.1): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.1 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.1 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 2026-10-29). 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