In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
nilfs2: fix inode number range checks
Patch series "nilfs2: fix potential issues related to reserved inodes".
This series fixes one use-after-free issue reported by syzbot, caused by
nilfs2's internal inode being exposed in the namespace on a corrupted
filesystem, and a couple of flaws that cause problems if the starting
number of non-reserved inodes written in the on-disk super block is
intentionally (or corruptly) changed from its default value.
This patch (of 3):
In the current implementation of nilfs2, "nilfs->ns_first_ino", which
gives the first non-reserved inode number, is read from the superblock,
but its lower limit is not checked.
As a result, if a number that overlaps with the inode number range of
reserved inodes such as the root directory or metadata files is set in the
super block parameter, the inode number test macros (NILFS_MDT_INODE and
NILFS_VALID_INODE) will not function properly.
In addition, these test macros use left bit-shift calculations using with
the inode number as the shift count via the BIT macro, but the result of a
shift calculation that exceeds the bit width of an integer is undefined in
the C specification, so if "ns_first_ino" is set to a large value other
than the default value NILFS_USER_INO (=11), the macros may potentially
malfunction depending on the environment.
Fix these issues by checking the lower bound of "nilfs->ns_first_ino" and
by preventing bit shifts equal to or greater than the NILFS_USER_INO
constant in the inode number test macros.
Also, change the type of "ns_first_ino" from signed integer to unsigned
integer to avoid the need for type casting in comparisons such as the
lower bound check introduced this time.
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
- 0.3% 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 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