CVE-2026-90042 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2026-90042
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-2026-90042 Details

Status: Received on 16 Sep 2026, 11:17 UTC

Published on: 16 Sep 2026, 11:17 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2026-90042 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2026-90042: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ceph: properly decrypt filenames in vmalloc() buffers The fscrypt subsystem uses the scatterlist crypto API, inheriting its requirement that any buffers are in the linear mapping region. However, the messenger client uses kvmalloc() to create buffers for messages, which will occasionally place those buffers in the vmalloc() region when physical memory fragmentation doesn't permit a large enough kmalloc(). The various callers of ceph_fname_to_usr() directly pass (slices of) raw messages from the MDS without considering that the messages may be in vmalloc() buffers, resulting in oopses especially on non-x86 platforms (see 'Closes:' for more details and a reproducer). Make ceph_fname_to_usr() explicitly tolerant of vmalloc()-allocated fname->ctext, fname->name, and/or oname->name buffers, using `tname` (which, when non-null, must be a linear address; when null, is briefly allocated as necessary) as a bounce buffer to avoid passing any inappropriate addresses to fscrypt_fname_disk_to_usr(). Additionally change parse_reply_info_readdir() -- the only function to supply its own `tname` -- to follow the new "tname must never come from vmalloc()" rule by passing NULL when the message is not in the linear region. Though this causes a per-dentry kmalloc()+kfree(), this overhead exists only when processing the minority of messages that spill into vmalloc(). My (crude) testing puts this at only about 1 in 8,000 readdir messages. Still, if the overhead proves unreasonable in the future, it is easy enough to mitigate: a future change could allocate a bounce buffer in parse_reply_info_readdir() and use that as `tname` instead.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2026-90042

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2026-90042 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-2026-90042

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2026-90042.

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-2026-90042, 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-2026-90042, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2026-90042 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2026-90042 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2026-90042 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2026-90042 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2026-90042: 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-2026-92465 – Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') vulnerability in Themeum WP Mega Menu allows Blind SQL Injecti...
  • CVE-2026-92463 – yshop-crm through 2.1.3 contains an authorization failure in the GET /admin-api/system/user/page endpoint where the @PreAuthorize annotation is com...
  • CVE-2026-92462 – yshop-crm through 2.1.3 fails to enforce authorization checks on the CrmFlowController deleteFlowStep endpoint, allowing any authenticated back-off...
  • CVE-2026-92461 – yshop-crm through 2.1.3 contains a missing authorization vulnerability in the GET /admin-api/crm/flow/flow-users endpoint that allows any logged-in...
  • CVE-2026-92460 – yshop-crm through 2.1.3 fails to enforce authorization on the GET /admin-api/crm/operatelog/page endpoint, allowing any authenticated back-office u...