CVE-2026-64159

netfs: Fix zeropoint update where i_size > remote_i_size

MEDIUM
5.5
CVSS Score
Published: July 19, 2026 at 03:40 PM UTC
Updated: October 21, 2026 at 01:19 PM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorLinux Kernel

Using Linux by Linux?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect Linux - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
MEDIUM5.5
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.2%

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfs: Fix zeropoint update where i_size > remote_i_size Fix the update of the zero point[*] by netfs_release_folio() when there is uncommitted data in the pagecache beyond the folio being released but the on-server EOF is in this folio (ie. i_size > remote_i_size). The update needs to limit zero_point to remote_i_size, not i_size as i_size is a local phenomenon reflecting updates made locally to the pagecache, not stuff written to the server. remote_i_size tracks the server's i_size. [*] The zero point is the file position from which we can assume that the server will just return zeros, so we can avoid generating reads. Note that netfs_invalidate_folio() probably doesn't need fixing as zero_point should be updated by setattr after truncation or fallocate. Found with: fsx -q -N 1000000 -p 10000 -o 128000 -l 600000 \ /xfstest.test/junk --replay-ops=junk.fsxops using the following as junk.fsxops: truncate 0x0 0x1bbae 0x82864 write 0x3ef2e 0xf9c8 0x1bbae write 0x67e05 0xcb5a 0x4e8f6 mapread 0x57781 0x85b6 0x7495f copy_range 0x5d3d 0x10329 0x54fac 0x7495f write 0x64710 0x1c2b 0x7495f mapread 0x64000 0x1000 0x7495f on cifs with the default cache option. It shows read-gaps on folio 0x64 failing with a short read (ie. it hits EOF) if the FMODE_READ check is commented out in netfs_perform_write(): if (//(file->f_mode & FMODE_READ) || netfs_is_cache_enabled(ctx)) { and no fscache. This was initially found with the generic/522 xfstest.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

6.10.8 ≤ v < 6.116.11.1 ≤ v < 7.0.116.10.86.116.11 rc66.11 rc77.17.1 rc17.1 rc27.1 rc37.1 rc4cce6bfa6ca0e30af9927b0074c97fe6a92f28092e2814004138a541110d4b2dc254a8f619c2c4ce0
Vendor states this is fixed in 4543a4d737944134a1394afe797622546fbcc98a (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5cd5207de519ef0c085f4f559adf5eefcb4c5202 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.11 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.12.114 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.18.57 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7.0.11 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7.1 (unaffected)

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet. What the record does show:

CVSS

Attack Vector
LOCAL
Complexity
LOW
Privileges
LOW
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
NONE
Integrity
NONE
Availability
HIGH
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusMODIFIED
CWE
NVD-CWE-noinfo

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card