In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
erofs: handle overlapped pclusters out of crafted images properly
syzbot reported a task hang issue due to a deadlock case where it is
waiting for the folio lock of a cached folio that will be used for
cache I/Os.
After looking into the crafted fuzzed image, I found it's formed with
several overlapped big pclusters as below:
Ext: logical offset | length : physical offset | length
0: 0.. 16384 | 16384 : 151552.. 167936 | 16384
1: 16384.. 32768 | 16384 : 155648.. 172032 | 16384
2: 32768.. 49152 | 16384 : 537223168.. 537239552 | 16384
...
Here, extent 0/1 are physically overlapped although it's entirely
_impossible_ for normal filesystem images generated by mkfs.
First, managed folios containing compressed data will be marked as
up-to-date and then unlocked immediately (unlike in-place folios) when
compressed I/Os are complete. If physical blocks are not submitted in
the incremental order, there should be separate BIOs to avoid dependency
issues. However, the current code mis-arranges z_erofs_fill_bio_vec()
and BIO submission which causes unexpected BIO waits.
Second, managed folios will be connected to their own pclusters for
efficient inter-queries. However, this is somewhat hard to implement
easily if overlapped big pclusters exist. Again, these only appear in
fuzzed images so let's simply fall back to temporary short-lived pages
for correctness.
Additionally, it justifies that referenced managed folios cannot be
truncated for now and reverts part of commit 2080ca1ed3e4 ("erofs: tidy
up struct z_erofs_bvec") for simplicity although it shouldn't be any
difference.
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
- 0.2% 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