Strix
26.1K

CVE-2026-43067

CRITICALCVSS 9.8/10EPSS 0.40%

Last modified

CVE-2026-43067 is a critical-severity vulnerability rated 9.8/10 on the CVSS scale. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: handle wraparound when searching for blocks for indirect mapped blocks Commit 4865c768b563 ("ext4: always allocate blocks only from groups inode can use") restricts what blocks will be allocated for indirect block based files to block numbers that fit within 32-bit block numbers. However, when using a review bot running on the latest Gemini LLM to check this commit when backporting into an LTS based kernel, it raised this concern: If ac->ac_g_ex.fe_group is >= ngroups (for instance, if the goal group was populated via stream allocation from s_mb_last_groups), then start will be >= ngroups. Does this allow allocating blocks beyond the 32-bit limit for indirect block mapped files? The commit message mentions that ext4_mb_scan_groups_linear() takes care to not select unsupported groups. However, its loop uses group = *start, and the very first iteration will call ext4_mb_scan_group() with this unsupported group because next_linear_group() is only called at the end of the iteration. After reviewing the code paths involved and considering the LLM review, I determined that this can happen when there is a file system where some files/directories are extent-mapped and others are indirect-block mapped. EPSS estimates a 0.40% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: handle wraparound when searching for blocks for indirect mapped blocks Commit 4865c768b563 ("ext4: always allocate blocks only from groups inode can use") restricts what blocks will be allocated for indirect block based files to block numbers that fit within 32-bit block numbers. However, when using a review bot running on the latest Gemini LLM to check this commit when backporting into an LTS based kernel, it raised this concern: If ac->ac_g_ex.fe_group is >= ngroups (for instance, if the goal group was populated via stream allocation from s_mb_last_groups), then start will be >= ngroups. Does this allow allocating blocks beyond the 32-bit limit for indirect block mapped files? The commit message mentions that ext4_mb_scan_groups_linear() takes care to not select unsupported groups. However, its loop uses group = *start, and the very first iteration will call ext4_mb_scan_group() with this unsupported group because next_linear_group() is only called at the end of the iteration. After reviewing the code paths involved and considering the LLM review, I determined that this can happen when there is a file system where some files/directories are extent-mapped and others are indirect-block mapped. To address this, add a safety clamp in ext4_mb_scan_groups().

Metrics

CVSS 3.1
9.8/10

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

EPSS Probability
0.40%

32.1th percentile

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days. Learn more

Affected Software

VendorProductVersions
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 5.15.203, < 5.16
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 6.6.130, < 6.6.134
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 6.12.77, < 6.12.80
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 6.18.14, < 6.18.21
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 6.19.4, < 6.19.11
LinuxLinux Kernel6.1.167

References

Timeline

Published
Last Modified
Status
Analyzed

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-43067?
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: handle wraparound when searching for blocks for indirect mapped blocks Commit 4865c768b563 ("ext4: always allocate blocks only from groups inode can use") restricts what blocks will be allocated for indirect block based files to block numbers that fit within 32-bit block numbers. However, when using a review bot running on the latest Gemini LLM to check this commit when backporting into an LTS based kernel, it raised this concern: If ac->ac_g_ex.fe_group is >= ngroups (for instance, if the goal group was populated via stream allocation from s_mb_last_groups), then start will be >= ngroups. Does this allow allocating blocks beyond the 32-bit limit for indirect block mapped files? The commit message mentions that ext4_mb_scan_groups_linear() takes care to not select unsupported groups. However, its loop uses group = *start, and the very first iteration will call ext4_mb_scan_group() with this unsupported group because next_linear_group() is only called at the end of the iteration. After reviewing the code paths involved and considering the LLM review, I determined that this can happen when there is a file system where some files/directories are extent-mapped and others are indirect-block mapped. To address this, add a safety clamp in ext4_mb_scan_groups().
How severe is CVE-2026-43067?
CVE-2026-43067 has a CVSS score of 9.8/10 (CRITICAL severity). The EPSS model estimates a 0.40% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.
How do I fix CVE-2026-43067?
Check the vendor references and advisories linked above for patched versions and mitigation guidance. You can also run a Strix scan to test if your systems are affected.

Are you affected by CVE-2026-43067?

Run a free Strix scan to check your systems for this vulnerability.

Scan your code now

Source: NVD / NIST