In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
jbd2: stop waiting for space when jbd2_cleanup_journal_tail() returns error
In __jbd2_log_wait_for_space(), we might call jbd2_cleanup_journal_tail()
to recover some journal space. But if an error occurs while executing
jbd2_cleanup_journal_tail() (e.g., an EIO), we don't stop waiting for free
space right away, we try other branches, and if j_committing_transaction
is NULL (i.e., the tid is 0), we will get the following complain:
============================================
JBD2: I/O error when updating journal superblock for sdd-8.
__jbd2_log_wait_for_space: needed 256 blocks and only had 217 space available
__jbd2_log_wait_for_space: no way to get more journal space in sdd-8
------------[ cut here ]------------
WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 139804 at fs/jbd2/checkpoint.c:109 __jbd2_log_wait_for_space+0x251/0x2e0
Modules linked in:
CPU: 2 PID: 139804 Comm: kworker/u8:3 Not tainted 6.6.0+ #1
RIP: 0010:__jbd2_log_wait_for_space+0x251/0x2e0
Call Trace:
add_transaction_credits+0x5d1/0x5e0
start_this_handle+0x1ef/0x6a0
jbd2__journal_start+0x18b/0x340
ext4_dirty_inode+0x5d/0xb0
__mark_inode_dirty+0xe4/0x5d0
generic_update_time+0x60/0x70
[...]
============================================
So only if jbd2_cleanup_journal_tail() returns 1, i.e., there is nothing to
clean up at the moment, continue to try to reclaim free space in other ways.
Note that this fix relies on commit 6f6a6fda2945 ("jbd2: fix ocfs2 corrupt
when updating journal superblock fails") to make jbd2_cleanup_journal_tail
return the correct error code.
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