CVE-2025-40025 — f2fs: fix to do sanity check on node footer for non inode dnode
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: f2fs: fix to do sanity check on node footer for non inode dnode As syzbot reported below: ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/f2fs/file.c:1243! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN NOPTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 5354 Comm: syz.0.0 Not tainted 6.17.0-rc1-syzkaller-00211-g90d970cade8e #0 PREEMPT(full) RIP: 0010:f2fs_truncate_hole+0x69e/0x6c0 fs/f2fs/file.c:1243 Call Trace: <TASK> f2fs_punch_hole+0x2db/0x330 fs/f2fs/file.c:1306 f2fs_fallocate+0x546/0x990 fs/f2fs/file.c:2018 vfs_fallocate+0x666/0x7e0 fs/open.c:342 ksys_fallocate fs/open.c:366 [inline] __do_sys_fallocate fs/open.c:371 [inline] __se_sys_fallocate fs/open.c:369 [inline] __x64_sys_fallocate+0xc0/0x110 fs/open.c:369 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0x3b0 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f RIP: 0033:0x7f1e65f8ebe9 w/ a fuzzed image, f2fs may encounter panic due to it detects inconsistent truncation range in direct node in f2fs_truncate_hole(). The root cause is: a non-inode dnode may has the same footer.ino and footer.nid, so the dnode will be parsed as an inode, then ADDRS_PER_PAGE() may return wrong blkaddr count which may be 923 typically, by chance, dn.ofs_in_node is equal to 923, then count can be calculated to 0 in below statement, later it will trigger panic w/ f2fs_bug_on(, count == 0 || ...). count = min(end_offset - dn.ofs_in_node, pg_end - pg_start); This patch introduces a new node_type NODE_TYPE_NON_INODE, then allowing passing the new_type to sanity_check_node_footer in f2fs_get_node_folio() to detect corruption that a non-inode dnode has the same footer.ino and footer.nid. Scripts to reproduce: mkfs.f2fs -f /dev/vdb mount /dev/vdb /mnt/f2fs touch /mnt/f2fs/foo touch /mnt/f2fs/bar dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/f2fs/foo bs=1M count=8 umount /mnt/f2fs inject.f2fs --node --mb i_nid --nid 4 --idx 0 --val 5 /dev/vdb mount /dev/vdb /mnt/f2fs xfs_io /mnt/f2fs/foo -c "fpunch 6984k 4k"
Who exploits it and how urgent it is
A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.
How the score was calculated
- EPSS 0.1% (30-day exploitation probability)+0
- 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.
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.
Attack characteristics
The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.
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 15, 2026 · 3 reading(s) · max 0.14%
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.
Timeline
What happened to this CVE, newest first.
- 2026
- Affected products added · linux/linux
- Record published
- CVSS changed · 7.8
- Source status changed · → Deferred
- Record created in this database
- 2025
- CVE published
Source activity
Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.
- 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026
References
2 on the record
Elsewhere on this site
Related CVEs (same products)
- Critical CVE-2026-99999 ipv4: validate checksum_start before completing checksum 20h
- Unknown CVE-2026-98432 ipv4: free inet_opt and ireq_opt after an RCU grace period 20h
- 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-2025-40025 is "f2fs: fix to do sanity check on node footer for non inode dnode", 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 0.14% 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.
Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.