GHSA-H5GX-JH73-27W4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-18 18:31 – Updated: 2026-05-29 21:31In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
f2fs: fix to do sanity check on node footer in {read,write}_end_io
-----------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/f2fs/data.c:358! Call Trace: blk_update_request+0x5eb/0xe70 block/blk-mq.c:987 blk_mq_end_request+0x3e/0x70 block/blk-mq.c:1149 blk_complete_reqs block/blk-mq.c:1224 [inline] blk_done_softirq+0x107/0x160 block/blk-mq.c:1229 handle_softirqs+0x283/0x870 kernel/softirq.c:579 __do_softirq kernel/softirq.c:613 [inline] invoke_softirq kernel/softirq.c:453 [inline] __irq_exit_rcu+0xca/0x1f0 kernel/softirq.c:680 irq_exit_rcu+0x9/0x30 kernel/softirq.c:696 instr_sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c:1050 [inline] sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0xa6/0xc0 arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c:1050
In f2fs_write_end_io(), it detects there is inconsistency in between node page index (nid) and footer.nid of node page.
If footer of node page is corrupted in fuzzed image, then we load corrupted node page w/ async method, e.g. f2fs_ra_node_pages() or f2fs_ra_node_page(), in where we won't do sanity check on node footer, once node page becomes dirty, we will encounter this bug after node page writeback.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-23265"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-03-18T18:16:25Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nf2fs: fix to do sanity check on node footer in {read,write}_end_io\n\n-----------[ cut here ]------------\nkernel BUG at fs/f2fs/data.c:358!\nCall Trace:\n \u003cIRQ\u003e\n blk_update_request+0x5eb/0xe70 block/blk-mq.c:987\n blk_mq_end_request+0x3e/0x70 block/blk-mq.c:1149\n blk_complete_reqs block/blk-mq.c:1224 [inline]\n blk_done_softirq+0x107/0x160 block/blk-mq.c:1229\n handle_softirqs+0x283/0x870 kernel/softirq.c:579\n __do_softirq kernel/softirq.c:613 [inline]\n invoke_softirq kernel/softirq.c:453 [inline]\n __irq_exit_rcu+0xca/0x1f0 kernel/softirq.c:680\n irq_exit_rcu+0x9/0x30 kernel/softirq.c:696\n instr_sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c:1050 [inline]\n sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0xa6/0xc0 arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c:1050\n \u003c/IRQ\u003e\n\nIn f2fs_write_end_io(), it detects there is inconsistency in between\nnode page index (nid) and footer.nid of node page.\n\nIf footer of node page is corrupted in fuzzed image, then we load corrupted\nnode page w/ async method, e.g. f2fs_ra_node_pages() or f2fs_ra_node_page(),\nin where we won\u0027t do sanity check on node footer, once node page becomes\ndirty, we will encounter this bug after node page writeback.",
"id": "GHSA-h5gx-jh73-27w4",
"modified": "2026-05-29T21:31:16Z",
"published": "2026-03-18T18:31:18Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-23265"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/50ac3ecd8e05b6bcc350c71a4307d40c030ec7e4"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/855c54f1803e3ebc613677b4f389c7f92656a1fc"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c386753db52b3a80afa6612bfdcb925aa5ca260f"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline
Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC
How durations are calculated
Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.
Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.
Loading timeline…
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.