BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-23267High confidence

f2fs: fix IS_CHECKPOINTED flag inconsistency issue caused by concurrent atomic commit and checkpoint writes

Linux · Linux

5.5MediumCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 20 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityMediumOperational priority:Low, lowered one band.downgradedsince 11 May 2026

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
  • EPSS is 0.11% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Linux Linux and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: No default targetRemediation target: Normal maintenance

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Cross-source reconciliation

Remediation availability differs by product scope

Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 20 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.

24 package states
Package result overrides the generic status

BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 20 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.

Repository candidate not checked

A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.

Distribution releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.12.74-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.1.164-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.18.13-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.18.13-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinuxAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-awsAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-azureAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-azure-fdeAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-azure-nvidiaAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-gcpAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-gkeAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-gkeopAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-ibmAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-lowlatencyAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-nvidiaAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-nvidia-lowlatencyAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-nvidia-tegraAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-oem-6.11Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-oracleAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-raspiAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-raspi-realtimeAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-realtimeAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-riscvAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-xilinxAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-12908

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 20 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
01

What, why and how

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: f2fs: fix IS_CHECKPOINTED flag inconsistency issue caused by concurrent atomic commit and checkpoint writes During SPO tests, when mounting F2FS, an -EINVAL error was returned from f2fs_recover_inode_page. The issue occurred under the following scenario Thread A Thread B f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_write - f2fs_do_sync_file // atomic = true - f2fs_fsync_node_pages : last_folio = inode folio : schedule before folio_lock(last_folio) f2fs_write_checkpoint - block_operations// writeback last_folio - schedule before f2fs_flush_nat_entries : set_fsync_mark(last_folio, 1) : set_dentry_mark(last_folio, 1) : folio_mark_dirty(last_folio) - __write_node_folio(last_folio) : f2fs_down_read(&sbi->node_write)//block - f2fs_flush_nat_entries : {struct nat_entry}->flag |= BIT(IS_CHECKPOINTED) - unblock_operations : f2fs_up_write(&sbi->node_write) f2fs_write_checkpoint//return : f2fs_do_write_node_page() f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_write//return SPO Thread A calls f2fs_need_dentry_mark(sbi, ino), and the last_folio has already been written once. However, the {struct nat_entry}->flag did not have the IS_CHECKPOINTED set, causing set_dentry_mark(last_folio, 1) and write last_folio again after Thread B finishes f2fs_write_checkpoint. After SPO and reboot, it was detected that {struct node_info}->blk_addr was not NULL_ADDR because Thread B successfully write the checkpoint. This issue only occurs in atomic write scenarios. For regular file fsync operations, the folio must be dirty. If block_operations->f2fs_sync_node_pages successfully submit the folio write, this path will not be executed. Otherwise, the f2fs_write_checkpoint will need to wait for the folio write submission to complete, as sbi->nr_pages[F2FS_DIRTY_NODES] > 0. Therefore, the situation where f2fs_need_dentry_mark checks that the {struct nat_entry}->flag /wo the IS_CHECKPOINTED flag, but the folio write has already been submitted, will not occur. Therefore, for atomic file fsync, sbi->node_write should be acquired through __write_node_folio to ensure that the IS_CHECKPOINTED flag correctly indicates that the checkpoint write has been completed.

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: f2fs: fix IS_CHECKPOINTED flag inconsistency issue caused by concurrent atomic commit and checkpoint writes During SPO tests, when mounting F2FS, an -EINVAL error was returned from f2fs_recover_inode_page. The issue occurred under the following scenario Thread A Thread B f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_write - f2fs_do_sync_file // atomic = true - f2fs_fsync_node_pages : last_folio = inode folio : schedule before folio_lock(last_folio) f2fs_write_checkpoint - block_operations// writeback last_folio - schedule before f2fs_flush_nat_entries : set_fsync_mark(last_folio, 1) : set_dentry_mark(last_folio, 1) : folio_mark_dirty(last_folio) - __write_node_folio(last_folio) : f2fs_down_read(&sbi->node_write)//block - f2fs_flush_nat_entries : {struct nat_entry}->flag |= BIT(IS_CHECKPOINTED) - unblock_operations : f2fs_up_write(&sbi->node_write) f2fs_write_checkpoint//return : f2fs_do_write_node_page() f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_write//return SPO Thread A calls f2fs_need_dentry_mark(sbi, ino), and the last_folio has already been written once. However, the {struct nat_entry}->flag did not have the IS_CHECKPOINTED set, causing set_dentry_mark(last_folio, 1) and write last_folio again after Thread B finishes f2fs_write_checkpoint. After SPO and reboot, it was detected that {struct node_info}->blk_addr was not NULL_ADDR because Thread B successfully write the checkpoint. This issue only occurs in atomic write scenarios. For regular file fsync operations, the folio must be dirty. If block_operations->f2fs_sync_node_pages successfully submit the folio write, this path will not be executed. Otherwise, the f2fs_write_checkpoint will need to wait for the folio write submission to complete, as sbi->nr_pages[F2FS_DIRTY_NODES] > 0. Therefore, the situation where f2fs_need_dentry_mark checks that the {struct nat_entry}->flag /wo the IS_CHECKPOINTED flag, but the folio write has already been submitted, will not occur. Therefore, for atomic file fsync, sbi->node_write should be acquired through __write_node_folio to ensure that the IS_CHECKPOINTED flag correctly indicates that the checkpoint write has been completed.

Why

The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: f2fs: fix IS_CHECKPOINTED flag inconsistency issue caused by concurrent atomic commit and checkpoint writes During SPO tests, when mounting F2FS, an -EINVAL error was returned from f2fs_recover_inode_page. The issue occurred under the following scenario Thread A Thread B f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_write - f2fs_do_sync_file // atomic = true - f2fs_fsync_node_pages : last_folio = inode folio : schedule before folio_lock(last_folio) f2fs_write_checkpoint - block_operations// writeback last_folio - schedule before f2fs_flush_nat_entries : set_fsync_mark(last_folio, 1) : set_dentry_mark(last_folio, 1) : folio_mark_dirty(last_folio) - __write_node_folio(last_folio) : f2fs_down_read(&sbi->node_write)//block - f2fs_flush_nat_entries : {struct nat_entry}->flag |= BIT(IS_CHECKPOINTED) - unblock_operations : f2fs_up_write(&sbi->node_write) f2fs_write_checkpoint//return : f2fs_do_write_node_page() f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_write//return SPO Thread A calls f2fs_need_dentry_mark(sbi, ino), and the last_folio has already been written once. However, the {struct nat_entry}->flag did not have the IS_CHECKPOINTED set, causing set_dentry_mark(last_folio, 1) and write last_folio again after Thread B finishes f2fs_write_checkpoint. After SPO and reboot, it was detected that {struct node_info}->blk_addr was not NULL_ADDR because Thread B successfully write the checkpoint. This issue only occurs in atomic write scenarios. For regular file fsync operations, the folio must be dirty. If block_operations->f2fs_sync_node_pages successfully submit the folio write, this path will not be executed. Otherwise, the f2fs_write_checkpoint will need to wait for the folio write submission to complete, as sbi->nr_pages[F2FS_DIRTY_NODES] > 0. Therefore, the situation where f2fs_need_dentry_mark checks that the {struct nat_entry}->flag /wo the IS_CHECKPOINTED flag, but the folio write has already been submitted, will not occur. Therefore, for atomic file fsync, sbi->node_write should be acquired through __write_node_folio to ensure that the IS_CHECKPOINTED flag correctly indicates that the checkpoint write has been completed.

Why

The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
local access → vulnerable operation → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Local
Privileges required
Low: a basic authenticated account is required
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration.
CWE not yet assigned
CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.INoneIntegrity impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
The issue can support a local privilege or sandbox boundary transition; normal system utilities may then be available in the gained context.
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

BSI · German · WID-SEC-2026-0790Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen, die möglicherweise zu einem Denial-of-Service-Zustand, einer Rechteausweitung oder einer Speicherbeschädigung führen können.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20260325Security Bulletin 25 Mar 2026

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 25 Mar 2026, published on 25 March 2026. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0954Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-23246 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23249 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23249 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23253 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23253 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23255 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23255 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23256 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23256 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23257 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23257 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23258 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23258 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23262 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23267 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23267 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23270 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23270 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23271 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23271 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23272 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23272 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23276 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23276 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23277 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23277 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23278 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23278 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23279 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23279 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23281 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0861Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-23241 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23242 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23242 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23243 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23243 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23249 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23249 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23256 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23256 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23257 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23257 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23258 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23258 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23262 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23267 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23267 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23272 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23272 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23278 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23278 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23351 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23392 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23392 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23427 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0831Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-23254 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23256 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23256 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23257 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23257 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23258 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23258 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23260 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23260 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23261 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23261 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23262 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23264 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23264 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23267 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23267 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23272 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23272 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23278 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23278 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23351 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23392 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23392 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23427 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23427 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23428 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0341Multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits Microsoft

De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans les produits Microsoft. Elles permettent à un attaquant de provoquer un problème de sécurité non spécifié par l'éditeur.

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2026-017566LinuxのLinux Kernelにおける不特定の脆弱性

Linuxカーネルにおいて、以下の脆弱性が修正されました。f2fsにおいて、同時に行われるアトミックコミットおよびチェックポイント書き込みによって引き起こされるIS_CHECKPOINTEDフラグの不整合問題を修正しました。SPOテスト中に、F2FSのマウント時にf2fs_recover_inode_pageから-EINVALエラーが返される問題が発生しました。この問題は以下のシナリオで発生しました。スレッドAとスレッドBの動作が関係します。スレッドAはf2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_writeからf2fs_do_sync_file(atomic = true)、f2fs_fsync_node_pages、そして最後のfolioのロック前にスケジュールされ、f2fs_write_checkpointがblock_operationsを介して最後のfolioを書き戻します。f2fs_flush_nat_entriesの前にスケジュールされ、set_fsync_mark(last_folio, 1)、set_dentry_mark(last_folio, 1)、folio_mark_dirty(last_folio)を実行し、続いて__write_node_folio(last_folio)、f2fs_down_read(&sbi-node_write)でブロックします。f2fs_flush_nat_entriesで{struct nat_entry}-flagにBIT(IS_CHECKPOINTED)が設定され、その後にf2fs_up_write(&sbi-node_write)でアンブロックされます。f2fs_write_checkpointはf2fs_do_write_node_page()を返し、f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_writeが返却されます。スレッドAはf2fs_need_dentry_mark(sbi, ino)を呼び出し、last_folioはすでに一度書き込まれていますが、{struct nat_entry}-flagにはIS_CHECKPOINTEDが設定されておらず、スレッドBがf2fs_write_checkpointを完了した後にset_dentry_mark(last_folio, 1)と最後のfolioの再書き込みが発生しました。SPOおよび再起動後、{struct node_info}-blk_addrがNULL_ADDRでないことが検出され、これはスレッドBが正常にチェックポイントを書き込んだことを示しています。この問題はアトミック書き込みのシナリオでのみ発生します。通常のファイルfsync操作ではfolioは必ずダーティ状態であり、block_operations-f2fs_sync_node_pagesが正常にfolio書き込みを送信すればこのパスは実行されません。そうでない場合、f2fs_write_checkpointはfolio書き込み送信の完了を待つ必要があり、sbi-nr_pages[F2FS_DIRTY_NODES]が0より大きくなります。したがって、f2fs_need_dentry_markは{struct nat_entry}-flagにIS_CHECKPOINTEDフラグがないことを確認しましたが、folio書き込みがすでに送信されている状況は発生しません。よって、アトミックファイルfsyncのために、IS_CHECKPOINTEDフラグがチェックポイント書き込み完了を正しく示すように、sbi-node_writeは__write_node_folioを通じて取得する必要があります。

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Fix availability varies by product
Affected
Linux: 608514deba38c8611ad330d6a3c8e2b9a1f68e4b < 32bc3c9fe18881d50dd51fd5f26d19fe1190dc0d, 608514deba38c8611ad330d6a3c8e2b9a1f68e4b < 75e19da068adf0dc5dd269dd157392434b9117d4, 608514deba38c8611ad330d6a3c8e2b9a1f68e4b < 962c167b0f262b9962207fbeaa531721d55ea00e, 608514deba38c8611ad330d6a3c8e2b9a1f68e4b < bd66b4c487d5091d2a65d6089e0de36f0c26a4c7, 608514deba38c8611ad330d6a3c8e2b9a1f68e4b < ed81bc5885460905f9160e7b463e5708fd056324, 608514deba38c8611ad330d6a3c8e2b9a1f68e4b < 7633a7387eb4d0259d6bea945e1d3469cd135bbc, 4.7
Fixed
Linux: < 4.7, 6.1.164 ≤ 6.1.*, 6.6.127 ≤ 6.6.*, 6.12.74 ≤ 6.12.*, 6.18.13 ≤ 6.18.*, 6.19.3 ≤ 6.19.*, 7.0 ≤ *
Action
Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 18 Mar 2026 · Last source change 11 May 2026, 22:03 UTC · CWE not yet assigned

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceNIST NVD
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-12908
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceUnavailable
NVD statusNVD enriched

Missing structured fields: CWE classification. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-23267 · cve.blacktree.nl