CVE-2026-90095

Unknown

Last modified

CVE-2026-90095 is a vulnerability of currently unknown severity. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fuse: Fix the condition to enable over-io-uring The existing condition in fuse_uring_cmd() is there only to avoid disabling io-uring for connections that already run with it, missing was a condition to refuse any IORING_OP_URING_CMD if the connection/channel didn't get enabled because of missing FUSE_INIT reply flag FUSE_OVER_IO_URING. Without the reply flag the barrier in fuse_uring_ready() doesn't work and IO could already be going on and cause deadlock states (at a minimum one between fch->bg_lock and queue->lock). The change itself is trivial, but brings behavior change, FUSE_OVER_IO_URING has to be set in the FUSE_INIT_REPLY by fuse servers to accept any IORING_OP_URING_CMD.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fuse: Fix the condition to enable over-io-uring The existing condition in fuse_uring_cmd() is there only to avoid disabling io-uring for connections that already run with it, missing was a condition to refuse any IORING_OP_URING_CMD if the connection/channel didn't get enabled because of missing FUSE_INIT reply flag FUSE_OVER_IO_URING. Without the reply flag the barrier in fuse_uring_ready() doesn't work and IO could already be going on and cause deadlock states (at a minimum one between fch->bg_lock and queue->lock). The change itself is trivial, but brings behavior change, FUSE_OVER_IO_URING has to be set in the FUSE_INIT_REPLY by fuse servers to accept any IORING_OP_URING_CMD. Libfuse does that and the only non-libfuse implementation I found (fractal-fuse) also does it. Qemu patches for fuse-io-uring are not merged yet, as far as I know. Moved up is the smp_load_acquire(&fch->initialized) check, as a fuse-server implementation might try to setup io-uring before FUSE_INIT is processed and might have gotten -EOPNOTSUPP instead of -EAGAIN. Also fixed is a stale comment that explains the handling of the FUSE_OVER_IO_URING flag in early RFC versions. If there should be a report from any library or application we probably need to revert this commit.

Affected Software

Source: CNA advisory (CVE.org). NVD analysis pending.

VendorProductVersions
LinuxLinux>= 3393ff964e0fa5def66570c54a4612bf9df06b76, < 8f9a725d89711ad027f6b7183586ef91528f106d; >= 3393ff964e0fa5def66570c54a4612bf9df06b76, < 1f59015e958174e89be58cc8db16d70a60d17255
LinuxLinux6.14

References

Timeline

Published
Last Modified
Status
Received

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-90095?
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fuse: Fix the condition to enable over-io-uring The existing condition in fuse_uring_cmd() is there only to avoid disabling io-uring for connections that already run with it, missing was a condition to refuse any IORING_OP_URING_CMD if the connection/channel didn't get enabled because of missing FUSE_INIT reply flag FUSE_OVER_IO_URING. Without the reply flag the barrier in fuse_uring_ready() doesn't work and IO could already be going on and cause deadlock states (at a minimum one between fch->bg_lock and queue->lock). The change itself is trivial, but brings behavior change, FUSE_OVER_IO_URING has to be set in the FUSE_INIT_REPLY by fuse servers to accept any IORING_OP_URING_CMD. Libfuse does that and the only non-libfuse implementation I found (fractal-fuse) also does it. Qemu patches for fuse-io-uring are not merged yet, as far as I know. Moved up is the smp_load_acquire(&fch->initialized) check, as a fuse-server implementation might try to setup io-uring before FUSE_INIT is processed and might have gotten -EOPNOTSUPP instead of -EAGAIN. Also fixed is a stale comment that explains the handling of the FUSE_OVER_IO_URING flag in early RFC versions. If there should be a report from any library or application we probably need to revert this commit.
How severe is CVE-2026-90095?
Severity scoring for CVE-2026-90095 is pending analysis.
How do I fix CVE-2026-90095?
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.

How Strix Helps

Related CVEs from 2026

Are you affected by CVE-2026-90095?

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

Scan your code now

Source: NVD / NIST