CVE-2026-23267 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2026-23267
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress

Attack Complexity Details

Attack Complexity:
Attack Complexity Analysis In Progress
Attack Vector:
Attack Vector Under Analysis
Privileges Required: None
No authentication is required for exploitation.
Scope:
Impact is confined to the initially vulnerable component.
User Interaction: None
No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2026-23267 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Last updated: 🕐 19 Mar 2026, 13:25 UTC
Originally published on: 🕕 18 Mar 2026, 18:16 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2026-23267 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2026-23267: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: f2fs: fix IS_CHECKPOINTED flag inconsistency issue caused by concurrent atomic commit and checkpoint writes During SPO tests, when mounting F2FS, an -EINVAL error was returned from f2fs_recover_inode_page. The issue occurred under the following scenario Thread A Thread B f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_write - f2fs_do_sync_file // atomic = true - f2fs_fsync_node_pages : last_folio = inode folio : schedule before folio_lock(last_folio) f2fs_write_checkpoint - block_operations// writeback last_folio - schedule before f2fs_flush_nat_entries : set_fsync_mark(last_folio, 1) : set_dentry_mark(last_folio, 1) : folio_mark_dirty(last_folio) - __write_node_folio(last_folio) : f2fs_down_read(&sbi->node_write)//block - f2fs_flush_nat_entries : {struct nat_entry}->flag |= BIT(IS_CHECKPOINTED) - unblock_operations : f2fs_up_write(&sbi->node_write) f2fs_write_checkpoint//return : f2fs_do_write_node_page() f2fs_ioc_commit_atomic_write//return SPO Thread A calls f2fs_need_dentry_mark(sbi, ino), and the last_folio has already been written once. However, the {struct nat_entry}->flag did not have the IS_CHECKPOINTED set, causing set_dentry_mark(last_folio, 1) and write last_folio again after Thread B finishes f2fs_write_checkpoint. After SPO and reboot, it was detected that {struct node_info}->blk_addr was not NULL_ADDR because Thread B successfully write the checkpoint. This issue only occurs in atomic write scenarios. For regular file fsync operations, the folio must be dirty. If block_operations->f2fs_sync_node_pages successfully submit the folio write, this path will not be executed. Otherwise, the f2fs_write_checkpoint will need to wait for the folio write submission to complete, as sbi->nr_pages[F2FS_DIRTY_NODES] > 0. Therefore, the situation where f2fs_need_dentry_mark checks that the {struct nat_entry}->flag /wo the IS_CHECKPOINTED flag, but the folio write has already been submitted, will not occur. Therefore, for atomic file fsync, sbi->node_write should be acquired through __write_node_folio to ensure that the IS_CHECKPOINTED flag correctly indicates that the checkpoint write has been completed.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2026-23267

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2026-23267 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2026-23267

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2026-23267.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2026-23267, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2026-23267, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

Confidentiality: None
CVE-2026-23267 does not compromise confidentiality.
Integrity: None
CVE-2026-23267 does not impact data integrity.
Availability: None
CVE-2026-23267 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2026-23267 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2026-23267: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

CVE-2026-40688 – A out-of-bounds write vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.3, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.6, FortiWeb 7.4.0 through 7.4.11 may allow...
CVE-2026-39399 – NuGet Gallery is a package repository that powers nuget.org. A security vulnerability exists in the NuGetGallery backend job’s handling of .nuspec ...
CVE-2026-39387 – BoidCMS is an open-source, PHP-based flat-file CMS for building simple websites and blogs, using JSON as its database. Versions prior to 2.1.3 are ...
CVE-2026-35589 – nanobot is a personal AI assistant. Versions prior to 0.1.5 contain a Cross-Site WebSocket Hijacking (CSWSH) vulnerability exists in the bridge's W...
CVE-2026-35034 – Jellyfin is an open source self hosted media server. Versions prior to 10.11.7 contain a denial of service vulnerability in the SyncPlay group crea...