CVE-2026-23214 : Detail

CVE-2026-23214

5.5
/
Medium
0.02%V4
Local
2026-02-18
14h21 +00:00
2026-02-20
11h30 +00:00
Notifications for a CVE
Stay informed of any changes for a specific CVE.
Notifications manage

CVE Descriptions

btrfs: reject new transactions if the fs is fully read-only

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: reject new transactions if the fs is fully read-only [BUG] There is a bug report where a heavily fuzzed fs is mounted with all rescue mount options, which leads to the following warnings during unmount: BTRFS: Transaction aborted (error -22) Modules linked in: CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 9758 Comm: repro.out Not tainted 6.19.0-rc5-00002-gb71e635feefc #7 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:find_free_extent_update_loop fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:4208 [inline] RIP: 0010:find_free_extent+0x52f0/0x5d20 fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:4611 Call Trace: btrfs_reserve_extent+0x2cd/0x790 fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:4705 btrfs_alloc_tree_block+0x1e1/0x10e0 fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:5157 btrfs_force_cow_block+0x578/0x2410 fs/btrfs/ctree.c:517 btrfs_cow_block+0x3c4/0xa80 fs/btrfs/ctree.c:708 btrfs_search_slot+0xcad/0x2b50 fs/btrfs/ctree.c:2130 btrfs_truncate_inode_items+0x45d/0x2350 fs/btrfs/inode-item.c:499 btrfs_evict_inode+0x923/0xe70 fs/btrfs/inode.c:5628 evict+0x5f4/0xae0 fs/inode.c:837 __dentry_kill+0x209/0x660 fs/dcache.c:670 finish_dput+0xc9/0x480 fs/dcache.c:879 shrink_dcache_for_umount+0xa0/0x170 fs/dcache.c:1661 generic_shutdown_super+0x67/0x2c0 fs/super.c:621 kill_anon_super+0x3b/0x70 fs/super.c:1289 btrfs_kill_super+0x41/0x50 fs/btrfs/super.c:2127 deactivate_locked_super+0xbc/0x130 fs/super.c:474 cleanup_mnt+0x425/0x4c0 fs/namespace.c:1318 task_work_run+0x1d4/0x260 kernel/task_work.c:233 exit_task_work include/linux/task_work.h:40 [inline] do_exit+0x694/0x22f0 kernel/exit.c:971 do_group_exit+0x21c/0x2d0 kernel/exit.c:1112 __do_sys_exit_group kernel/exit.c:1123 [inline] __se_sys_exit_group kernel/exit.c:1121 [inline] __x64_sys_exit_group+0x3f/0x40 kernel/exit.c:1121 x64_sys_call+0x2210/0x2210 arch/x86/include/generated/asm/syscalls_64.h:232 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xe8/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f RIP: 0033:0x44f639 Code: Unable to access opcode bytes at 0x44f60f. RSP: 002b:00007ffc15c4e088 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 00000000000000e7 RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00000000004c32f0 RCX: 000000000044f639 RDX: 000000000000003c RSI: 00000000000000e7 RDI: 0000000000000001 RBP: 0000000000000001 R08: ffffffffffffffc0 R09: 0000000000000000 R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00000000004c32f0 R13: 0000000000000001 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000001 Since rescue mount options will mark the full fs read-only, there should be no new transaction triggered. But during unmount we will evict all inodes, which can trigger a new transaction, and triggers warnings on a heavily corrupted fs. [CAUSE] Btrfs allows new transaction even on a read-only fs, this is to allow log replay happen even on read-only mounts, just like what ext4/xfs do. However with rescue mount options, the fs is fully read-only and cannot be remounted read-write, thus in that case we should also reject any new transactions. [FIX] If we find the fs has rescue mount options, we should treat the fs as error, so that no new transaction can be started.

CVE Informations

Related Weaknesses

CWE-ID Weakness Name Source
CWE Other No informations.

Metrics

Metrics Score Severity CVSS Vector Source
V3.1 5.5 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Local

The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities.

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

Low

The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

None

There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

High

There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

nvd@nist.gov

EPSS

EPSS is a scoring model that predicts the likelihood of a vulnerability being exploited.

EPSS Score

The EPSS model produces a probability score between 0 and 1 (0 and 100%). The higher the score, the greater the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited.

EPSS Percentile

The percentile is used to rank CVE according to their EPSS score. For example, a CVE in the 95th percentile according to its EPSS score is more likely to be exploited than 95% of other CVE. Thus, the percentile is used to compare the EPSS score of a CVE with that of other CVE.

Products Mentioned

Configuraton 0

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.11 To (excluding) 6.12.70

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.13 To (excluding) 6.18.10

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.19

References