BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-45858High confidence

ext4: don't zero the entire extent if EXT4_EXT_DATA_PARTIAL_VALID1

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 21 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 30 May 2026

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
  • EPSS is 0.16% 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 21 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 21 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.6.12.85-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcelinuxAffected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open.Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.18.14-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.18.14-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 6 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
Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

1 current
CVE-2026-45858 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 17 · interimSUSE Product Security TeamCVE-2026-45858
272 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • kernel-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 12 SP4
  • kernel-default-base as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 12 SP4
  • kernel-default-devel as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 12 SP4
  • kernel-default-man as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 12 SP4
  • kernel-devel as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 12 SP4
  • kernel-macros as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 12 SP4
  • kernel-source as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 12 SP4
  • kernel-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP1
  • kernel-default-base as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP1
  • kernel-default-devel as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP1
  • kernel-default-man as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP1
  • kernel-devel as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP1
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: don't zero the entire extent if EXT4_EXT_DATA_PARTIAL_VALID1 When allocating initialized blocks from a large unwritten extent, or when splitting an unwritten extent during end I/O and converting it to initialized, there is currently a potential issue of stale data if the extent needs to be split in the middle. 0 A B N [UUUUUUUUUUUU] U: unwritten extent [--DDDDDDDD--] D: valid data | | ----> this range needs to be initialized ext4_split_extent() first try to split this extent at B with EXT4_EXT_DATA_ENTIRE_VALID1 and EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT flag set, but ext4_split_extent_at() failed to split this extent due to temporary lack of space. It zeroout B to N and mark the entire extent from 0 to N as written. 0 A B N [WWWWWWWWWWWW] W: written extent [SSDDDDDDDDZZ] Z: zeroed, S: stale data ext4_split_extent() then try to split this extent at A with EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flag set. This time, it split successfully and left a stale written extent from 0 to A. 0 A B N [WW|WWWWWWWWWW] [SS|DDDDDDDDZZ] Fix this by pass EXT4_EXT_DATA_PARTIAL_VALID1 to ext4_split_extent_at() when splitting at B, don't convert the entire extent to written and left it as unwritten after zeroing out B to N. The remaining work is just like the standard two-part split. ext4_split_extent() will pass the EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flag when it calls ext4_split_extent_at() for the second time, allowing it to properly handle the split. If the split is successful, it will keep extent from 0 to A as unwritten.
Remediation
To install this SUSE Security Update use the SUSE recommended installation methods like YaST online_update or "zypper patch".
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-2026-32324

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 21 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: ext4: don't zero the entire extent if EXT4_EXT_DATA_PARTIAL_VALID1 When allocating initialized blocks from a large unwritten extent, or when splitting an unwritten extent during end I/O and converting it to initialized, there is currently a potential issue of stale data if the extent needs to be split in the middle. 0 A B N [UUUUUUUUUUUU] U: unwritten extent [--DDDDDDDD--] D: valid data |<- ->| ----> this range needs to be initialized ext4_split_extent() first try to split this extent at B with EXT4_EXT_DATA_ENTIRE_VALID1 and EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT flag set, but ext4_split_extent_at() failed to split this extent due to temporary lack of space. It zeroout B to N and mark the entire extent from 0 to N as written. 0 A B N [WWWWWWWWWWWW] W: written extent [SSDDDDDDDDZZ] Z: zeroed, S: stale data ext4_split_extent() then try to split this extent at A with EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flag set. This time, it split successfully and left a stale written extent from 0 to A. 0 A B N [WW|WWWWWWWWWW] [SS|DDDDDDDDZZ] Fix this by pass EXT4_EXT_DATA_PARTIAL_VALID1 to ext4_split_extent_at() when splitting at B, don't convert the entire extent to written and left it as unwritten after zeroing out B to N. The remaining work is just like the standard two-part split. ext4_split_extent() will pass the EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flag when it calls ext4_split_extent_at() for the second time, allowing it to properly handle the split. If the split is successful, it will keep extent from 0 to A as unwritten.

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: don't zero the entire extent if EXT4_EXT_DATA_PARTIAL_VALID1 When allocating initialized blocks from a large unwritten extent, or when splitting an unwritten extent during end I/O and converting it to initialized, there is currently a potential issue of stale data if the extent needs to be split in the middle. 0 A B N [UUUUUUUUUUUU] U: unwritten extent [--DDDDDDDD--] D: valid data |<- ->| ----> this range needs to be initialized ext4_split_extent() first try to split this extent at B with EXT4_EXT_DATA_ENTIRE_VALID1 and EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT flag set, but ext4_split_extent_at() failed to split this extent due to temporary lack of space. It zeroout B to N and mark the entire extent from 0 to N as written. 0 A B N [WWWWWWWWWWWW] W: written extent [SSDDDDDDDDZZ] Z: zeroed, S: stale data ext4_split_extent() then try to split this extent at A with EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flag set. This time, it split successfully and left a stale written extent from 0 to A. 0 A B N [WW|WWWWWWWWWW] [SS|DDDDDDDDZZ] Fix this by pass EXT4_EXT_DATA_PARTIAL_VALID1 to ext4_split_extent_at() when splitting at B, don't convert the entire extent to written and left it as unwritten after zeroing out B to N. The remaining work is just like the standard two-part split. ext4_split_extent() will pass the EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flag when it calls ext4_split_extent_at() for the second time, allowing it to properly handle the split. If the split is successful, it will keep extent from 0 to A as unwritten.

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: ext4: don't zero the entire extent if EXT4_EXT_DATA_PARTIAL_VALID1 When allocating initialized blocks from a large unwritten extent, or when splitting an unwritten extent during end I/O and converting it to initialized, there is currently a potential issue of stale data if the extent needs to be split in the middle. 0 A B N [UUUUUUUUUUUU] U: unwritten extent [--DDDDDDDD--] D: valid data |<- ->| ----> this range needs to be initialized ext4_split_extent() first try to split this extent at B with EXT4_EXT_DATA_ENTIRE_VALID1 and EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT flag set, but ext4_split_extent_at() failed to split this extent due to temporary lack of space. It zeroout B to N and mark the entire extent from 0 to N as written. 0 A B N [WWWWWWWWWWWW] W: written extent [SSDDDDDDDDZZ] Z: zeroed, S: stale data ext4_split_extent() then try to split this extent at A with EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flag set. This time, it split successfully and left a stale written extent from 0 to A. 0 A B N [WW|WWWWWWWWWW] [SS|DDDDDDDDZZ] Fix this by pass EXT4_EXT_DATA_PARTIAL_VALID1 to ext4_split_extent_at() when splitting at B, don't convert the entire extent to written and left it as unwritten after zeroing out B to N. The remaining work is just like the standard two-part split. ext4_split_extent() will pass the EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flag when it calls ext4_split_extent_at() for the second time, allowing it to properly handle the split. If the split is successful, it will keep extent from 0 to A as unwritten.

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-2026-1700Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service Angriff durchzuführen oder andere nicht näher spezifizierte Auswirkungen zu erzielen.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20260603Security Bulletin 3 Jun 2026

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 3 Jun 2026, published on 3 June 2026. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1066Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-45839 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45840 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45840 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45841 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45841 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45842 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45842 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45843 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45843 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45844 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45844 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45845 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45845 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45846 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45846 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45855 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45855 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45858 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45858 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45899 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45899 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45911 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45911 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45920 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45920 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45924 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45924 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45942 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45942 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45943 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45943 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45956 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45956 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45958 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1029Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2026-43449 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43450 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43450 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43451 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43451 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43452 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43452 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43466 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43466 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43475 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43475 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43493 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43493 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43496 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43496 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45857 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45857 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45858 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45858 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45871 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45871 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45877 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45877 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45899 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45899 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45904 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45904 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45905 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45905 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45915 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45915 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45917 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45917 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45920 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0956Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2026-43494 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43501 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43501 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43502 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43502 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45837 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45837 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45838 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45838 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45840 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45840 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45841 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45841 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45848 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45848 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45857 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45857 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45858 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45858 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45861 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45861 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45862 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45862 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45870 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45870 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45884 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45884 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45888 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45888 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45891 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45891 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45894 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45894 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45899 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

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

d?id=CVE-2026-45846 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45847 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45847 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45848 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45848 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45849 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45849 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45851 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45851 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45852 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45852 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45855 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45855 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45856 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45856 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45857 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45857 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45858 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45858 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45859 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45859 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45860 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45860 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45861 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45861 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45862 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45862 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45864 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45864 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45865 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45865 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45866 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45866 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45867 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0927Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2026-45837 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45838 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45838 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45839 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45839 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45840 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45840 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45841 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45841 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45848 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45848 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45851 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45851 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45853 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45853 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45857 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45857 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45858 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45858 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45861 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45861 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45862 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45862 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45867 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45867 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45868 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45868 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45869 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45869 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45870 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45870 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45871 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45871 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45875 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0926Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-45844 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45845 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45845 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45846 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45846 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45847 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45847 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45848 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45848 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45852 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45852 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45855 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45855 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45856 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45856 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45857 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45857 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45858 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45858 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45860 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45860 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45862 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45862 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45864 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45864 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45866 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45866 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45867 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45867 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45868 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45868 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45869 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45869 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45870 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2026-020744LinuxのLinux Kernelにおける不特定の脆弱性

Linuxカーネルのext4ファイルシステムには、未書き込みの拡張領域を分割する際に古いデータが残る脆弱性がありました。この問題は、ext4_split_extent()関数が特定のフラグ設定時に範囲全体をゼロクリアせず、一部を誤って書き込み済みとして扱うことに起因します。修正では、分割処理で適切なフラグを使用し、ゼロクリアすべき範囲を正しく管理して古いデータの残存を防止しました。

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
Fixed
Linux: < 3.7, 6.6.130 ≤ 6.6.*, 6.12.75 ≤ 6.12.*, 6.18.14 ≤ 6.18.*, 6.19.4 ≤ 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 27 May 2026 · Last source change 30 May 2026, 10:41 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-2026-32324
Product sourceVendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team
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
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-32324↗Vendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team↗CVE authority or vendor reference↗Patch or update reference↗Patch or update reference↗Patch or update reference↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
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-2026-45858 · cve.blacktree.nl