CVE-2026-43065
Last modified
CVE-2026-43065 is a medium-severity vulnerability rated 5.5/10 on the CVSS scale. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: always drain queued discard work in ext4_mb_release() While reviewing recent ext4 patch[1], Sashiko raised the following concern[2]: > If the filesystem is initially mounted with the discard option, > deleting files will populate sbi->s_discard_list and queue > s_discard_work. If it is then remounted with nodiscard, the > EXT4_MOUNT_DISCARD flag is cleared, but the pending s_discard_work is > neither cancelled nor flushed. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260319094545.19291-1-qiang.zhang@linux.dev/ [2] https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260319094545.19291-1-qiang.zhang%40linux.dev The concern was valid, but it had nothing to do with the patch[1]. One of the problems with Sashiko in its current (early) form is that it will detect pre-existing issues and report it as a problem with the patch that it is reviewing. In practice, it would be hard to hit deliberately (unless you are a malicious syzkaller fuzzer), since it would involve mounting the file system with -o discard, and then deleting a large number of files, remounting the file system with -o nodiscard, and then immediately unmounting the file system before the queued discard work has a change to drain on its own. Fix it because it's a real bug, and to avoid Sashiko from raising this concern when analyzing future patches to mballoc.c.. EPSS estimates a 0.12% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.
Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: always drain queued discard work in ext4_mb_release() While reviewing recent ext4 patch[1], Sashiko raised the following concern[2]: > If the filesystem is initially mounted with the discard option, > deleting files will populate sbi->s_discard_list and queue > s_discard_work. If it is then remounted with nodiscard, the > EXT4_MOUNT_DISCARD flag is cleared, but the pending s_discard_work is > neither cancelled nor flushed. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260319094545.19291-1-qiang.zhang@linux.dev/ [2] https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260319094545.19291-1-qiang.zhang%40linux.dev The concern was valid, but it had nothing to do with the patch[1]. One of the problems with Sashiko in its current (early) form is that it will detect pre-existing issues and report it as a problem with the patch that it is reviewing. In practice, it would be hard to hit deliberately (unless you are a malicious syzkaller fuzzer), since it would involve mounting the file system with -o discard, and then deleting a large number of files, remounting the file system with -o nodiscard, and then immediately unmounting the file system before the queued discard work has a change to drain on its own. Fix it because it's a real bug, and to avoid Sashiko from raising this concern when analyzing future patches to mballoc.c.
Metrics
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Affected Software
| Vendor | Product | Versions | Update |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 5.15, < 5.15.203 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 5.16, < 6.1.168 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.2, < 6.6.131 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.7, < 6.12.80 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.13, < 6.18.21 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | >= 6.19, < 6.19.11 | — |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | 7.0 | Rc1 |
References
Timeline
- Published
- Last Modified
- Status
- Analyzed
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CVE-2026-43065?
How severe is CVE-2026-43065?
How do I fix CVE-2026-43065?
Are you affected by CVE-2026-43065?
Run a free Strix scan to check your systems for this vulnerability.
Scan your code nowSource: NVD / NIST
