CVE-2026-64593 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2026-64593
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress
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-2026-64593 Details

Status: Received on 06 Aug 2026, 08:16 UTC

Published on: 06 Aug 2026, 08:16 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2026-64593 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2026-64593: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: do not trim a device which is not writeable [BUG] There is a bug report that btrfs/242 can randomly fail with the following NULL pointer dereference: run fstests btrfs/242 at 2026-06-01 10:25:08 BTRFS: device fsid d4d7f234-487c-4787-88e4-47a8b68c9874 devid 1 transid 9 /dev/sdc (8:32) scanned by mount (122609) BTRFS info (device sdc): first mount of filesystem d4d7f234-487c-4787-88e4-47a8b68c9874 BTRFS info (device sdc): using crc32c checksum algorithm BTRFS warning (device sdc): devid 2 uuid fbe72d72-3272-482d-80fb-ab88ed398192 is missing BTRFS warning (device sdc): devid 2 uuid fbe72d72-3272-482d-80fb-ab88ed398192 is missing BTRFS info (device sdc): allowing degraded mounts BTRFS info (device sdc): turning on async discard BTRFS info (device sdc): enabling free space tree Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 0000000000000018 user pgtable: 4k pages, 48-bit VAs, pgdp=000000013fd6b000 CPU: 4 UID: 0 PID: 122625 Comm: fstrim Not tainted 7.0.10-2-default #1 PREEMPT(full) openSUSE Tumbleweed e9a5f6b24978fba3bf015a992f865837fdfff3dd Hardware name: QEMU KVM Virtual Machine, BIOS edk2-20250812-19.fc42 08/12/2025 pstate: 01400005 (nzcv daif +PAN -UAO -TCO +DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) pc : btrfs_trim_fs+0x34c/0xa00 [btrfs] lr : btrfs_trim_fs+0x1f0/0xa00 [btrfs] Call trace: btrfs_trim_fs+0x34c/0xa00 [btrfs f02c1d570ceea621c69d302ba75dd61868083840] (P) btrfs_ioctl_fitrim+0xe8/0x178 [btrfs f02c1d570ceea621c69d302ba75dd61868083840] btrfs_ioctl+0xdd4/0x2bd8 [btrfs f02c1d570ceea621c69d302ba75dd61868083840] __arm64_sys_ioctl+0xac/0x108 invoke_syscall.constprop.0+0x5c/0xd0 el0_svc_common.constprop.0+0x40/0xf0 do_el0_svc+0x24/0x40 el0_svc+0x40/0x1d0 el0t_64_sync_handler+0xa0/0xe8 el0t_64_sync+0x1b0/0x1b8 Code: 17ffff83 f94017e0 f9002be0 f9402ea0 (f9400c00) ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- Also the reporter is very kind to test the following ASSERT() added to btrfs_trim_free_extents_throttle(): ASSERT(device->bdev, "devid=%llu path=%s dev_state=0x%lx\n", device->devid, btrfs_dev_name(device), device->dev_state); And it shows the following output: assertion failed: device->bdev, in extent-tree.c:6630 (devid=2 path=/dev/sdd dev_state=0x82) Which means the device->bdev is NULL, and the dev_state is BTRFS_DEV_STATE_IN_FS_METADATA | BTRFS_DEV_STATE_ITEM_FOUND, without BTRFS_DEV_STATE_WRITEABLE flag set. [CAUSE] The pc points to the following call chain: btrfs_trim_fs() |- btrfs_trim_free_extents() |- btrfs_trim_free_extents_throttle() |- bdev_max_discard_sectors(device->bdev) So the NULL pointer dereference is caused by device->bdev being NULL. This looks impossible by a quick glance, as just before calling btrfs_trim_free_extents_throttle(), we have skipped any device that has BTRFS_DEV_STATE_MISSING flag set. However in this particular case, there is a window where the missing device is later re-scanned, causing btrfs to remove the BTRFS_DEV_STATE_MISSING flag: btrfs_control_ioctl() |- btrfs_scan_one_device() |- device_list_add() |- rcu_assign_pointer(device->name, name); | This updates the missing device's path to the new good path. | |- clear_bit(BTRFS_DEV_STATE_MISSING, &device->dev_state) This removes the BTRFS_DEV_STATE_MISSING flag. This allows the missing device to re-appear and clear the BTRFS_DEV_STATE_MISSING flag. However the device still does not have the BTRFS_DEV_STATE_WRITEABLE flag set, nor is its bdev pointer updated. The bdev pointer remains NULL, triggering the crash later. [FIX] This is a big de-synchronization between BTRFS_DEV_STATE_MISSING and device->bdev pointer, and shows a gap in btrfs's re-appearing-device handling. The proper handling of re-appearing device will need quite some extra work, which is out of the context of this small ---truncated---

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2026-64593

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2026-64593 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-2026-64593

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2026-64593.

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-2026-64593, 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-2026-64593, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2026-64593 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2026-64593 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2026-64593 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2026-64593 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2026-64593: 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-2026-55980 – A denial-of-service vulnerability in CatchPulse could allow an attacker to conduct a stack buffer overrun attack, leading to a denial-of-service condition.
  • CVE-2026-55979 – An improper access control check in CatchPulse's named pipe communication interface could allow an attacker to invoke CatchPulse functions. This is...
  • CVE-2026-55978 – An improper access control vulnerability in CatchPulse could allow a non-administrative local attacker to connect to an unrestricted kernel filter ...
  • CVE-2026-64640 – Apache Polaris did not consistently validate storage locations supplied during table and view registration. An authenticated principal with permis...
  • CVE-2026-19022 – A vulnerability was determined in OpenHands up to 0.62.0. The affected element is the function initialize_repo of the file OpenHands/resolver/send_...