High

CVE-2023-54121 — btrfs: fix incorrect splitting in btrfs_drop_extent_map_range

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: fix incorrect splitting in btrfs_drop_extent_map_range In production we were seeing a variety of WARN_ON()'s in the extent_map code, specifically in btrfs_drop_extent_map_range() when we have to call add_extent_mapping() for our second split. Consider the following extent map layout PINNED [0 16K) [32K, 48K) and then we call btrfs_drop_extent_map_range for [0, 36K), with skip_pinned == true. The initial loop will have start = 0 end = 36K len = 36K we will find the [0, 16k) extent, but since we are pinned we will skip it, which has this code start = em_end; if (end != (u64)-1) len = start + len - em_end; em_end here is 16K, so now the values are start = 16K len = 16K + 36K - 16K = 36K len should instead be 20K. This is a problem when we find the next extent at [32K, 48K), we need to split this extent to leave [36K, 48k), however the code for the split looks like this split->start = start + len; split->len = em_end - (start + len); In this case we have em_end = 48K split->start = 16K + 36K // this should be 16K + 20K split->len = 48K - (16K + 36K) // this overflows as 16K + 36K is 52K and now we have an invalid extent_map in the tree that potentially overlaps other entries in the extent map. Even in the non-overlapping case we will have split->start set improperly, which will cause problems with any block related calculations. We don't actually need len in this loop, we can simply use end as our end point, and only adjust start up when we find a pinned extent we need to skip. Adjust the logic to do this, which keeps us from inserting an invalid extent map. We only skip_pinned in the relocation case, so this is relatively rare, except in the case where you are running relocation a lot, which can happen with auto relocation on.

Published Dec 24, 2025 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: Linux

Low

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.

How the score was calculated

EPSS 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+1
Technical severity (high)+6

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation

Not confirmed

Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.

EPSS FIRST

0.16%

ahead of 5% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026

Affects

Linux

CVSS base

7.8

High · 2 source(s)

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Linux Linux).
No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status	Source
Linux	Linux	≥ 55ef68990029fcd8d04d42fc184aa7fb18cf309e and < 9f68e2105dd96cf0fafffffafb2337fbd0fbae1f≥ 55ef68990029fcd8d04d42fc184aa7fb18cf309e and < b43a4c99d878cf5e59040e45c96bb0a8358bfb3b≥ 55ef68990029fcd8d04d42fc184aa7fb18cf309e and < c962098ca4af146f2625ed64399926a098752c9cversion c87afd35a28b2661a2626a1b28e9fd69adcad9f9≥ 2.6.32.19 and < 2.6.33version 2.6.33	Vulnerable	CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector

Local

Attack complexity

Low

Privileges required

Low

User interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

Availability

High

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

Score	Version	Severity	Expl.	Impact	Scored by
7.8	CVSS 3.1	High	1.8	5.9	416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67 via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.8	CVSS 3.1	High	—	—	Linux via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H (score shown at the top: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67)

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.16%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

Local/physical vector: focus on endpoint telemetry (EDR) from affected hosts.

endpoint telemetry (EDR)

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

2026
Affected products added · linux/linux
Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Record published
Oct 13, 2026
CVSS changed · 7.8
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
Source status changed · → Deferred
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
Record created in this database
Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
2025
CVE published
Dec 24, 2025 · Linux

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

3 on the record

git.kernel.org/stable/c/b43a4c99d878cf5e59040e45c96bb0a8358bfb3b
NIST National Vulnerability Database
git.kernel.org/stable/c/c962098ca4af146f2625ed64399926a098752c9c
NIST National Vulnerability Database
git.kernel.org/stable/c/9f68e2105dd96cf0fafffffafb2337fbd0fbae1f
NIST National Vulnerability Database

Elsewhere on this site

Linux
every CVE for this vendor

Related CVEs (same products)

Critical CVE-2026-99999 ipv4: validate checksum_start before completing checksum 11h
Unknown CVE-2026-98432 ipv4: free inet_opt and ireq_opt after an RCU grace period 11h
Unknown CVE-2026-98424 wifi: cfg80211: undo netns switch if renaming the wiphy fails 1d
Unknown CVE-2026-98425 wifi: mac80211: don't warn when an IBSS has no channel to scan 1d
Unknown CVE-2026-98426 wifi: mwifiex: fix IRQ leak using wrong index in MSI-X error path 1d
Unknown CVE-2026-98427 net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call 1d

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
No CISA SSVC assessment.
No CWE classification.
No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2023-54121 is "btrfs: fix incorrect splitting in btrfs_drop_extent_map_range", rated High. It affects Linux (Linux); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.8 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.16% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.