In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
f2fs: fix to do sanity check on F2FS_INLINE_DATA flag in inode during GC
syzbot reports a f2fs bug as below:
------------[ cut here ]------------
kernel BUG at fs/f2fs/inline.c:258!
CPU: 1 PID: 34 Comm: kworker/u8:2 Not tainted 6.9.0-rc6-syzkaller-00012-g9e4bc4bcae01 #0
RIP: 0010:f2fs_write_inline_data+0x781/0x790 fs/f2fs/inline.c:258
Call Trace:
f2fs_write_single_data_page+0xb65/0x1d60 fs/f2fs/data.c:2834
f2fs_write_cache_pages fs/f2fs/data.c:3133 [inline]
__f2fs_write_data_pages fs/f2fs/data.c:3288 [inline]
f2fs_write_data_pages+0x1efe/0x3a90 fs/f2fs/data.c:3315
do_writepages+0x35b/0x870 mm/page-writeback.c:2612
__writeback_single_inode+0x165/0x10b0 fs/fs-writeback.c:1650
writeback_sb_inodes+0x905/0x1260 fs/fs-writeback.c:1941
wb_writeback+0x457/0xce0 fs/fs-writeback.c:2117
wb_do_writeback fs/fs-writeback.c:2264 [inline]
wb_workfn+0x410/0x1090 fs/fs-writeback.c:2304
process_one_work kernel/workqueue.c:3254 [inline]
process_scheduled_works+0xa12/0x17c0 kernel/workqueue.c:3335
worker_thread+0x86d/0xd70 kernel/workqueue.c:3416
kthread+0x2f2/0x390 kernel/kthread.c:388
ret_from_fork+0x4d/0x80 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:147
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:244
The root cause is: inline_data inode can be fuzzed, so that there may
be valid blkaddr in its direct node, once f2fs triggers background GC
to migrate the block, it will hit f2fs_bug_on() during dirty page
writeback.
Let's add sanity check on F2FS_INLINE_DATA flag in inode during GC,
so that, it can forbid migrating inline_data inode's data block for
fixing.
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
- 0.2% 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