Linux Kernel up to 6.18.49/7.2.3 Ceph fs/super.c ceph_undo_wrbuffer_claim denial of service

CVSS Meta Temp Score
CVSS is a standardized scoring system to determine possibilities of attacks. The Temp Score considers temporal factors like disclosure, exploit and countermeasures. The unique Meta Score calculates the average score of different sources to provide a normalized scoring system.
Current Exploit Price (≈)
Our analysts are monitoring exploit markets and are in contact with vulnerability brokers. The range indicates the observed or calculated exploit price to be seen on exploit markets. A good indicator to understand the monetary effort required for and the popularity of an attack.
CTI Interest Score
Our Cyber Threat Intelligence team is monitoring different web sites, mailing lists, exploit markets and social media networks. The CTI Interest Score identifies the interest of attackers and the security community for this specific vulnerability in real-time. A high score indicates an elevated risk to be targeted for this vulnerability.
4.0$0-$5k0.42+

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability identified as problematic has been detected in Linux Kernel up to 6.18.49/7.2.3. Impacted is the function ceph_undo_wrbuffer_claim of the file fs/super.c of the component Ceph. Performing a manipulation results in denial of service. This vulnerability is reported as CVE-2026-89646. The attack requires a local approach. No exploit exists. You should upgrade the affected component.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in Linux Kernel up to 6.18.49/7.2.3. This affects the function ceph_undo_wrbuffer_claim of the file fs/super.c of the component Ceph. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a denial of service vulnerability. CWE is classifying the issue as CWE-404. The product does not release or incorrectly releases a resource before it is made available for re-use. This is going to have an impact on availability. The summary by CVE is:

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ceph: fix leaked inode reference on writeback abort at umount ceph_dirty_folio() takes a wrbuffer claim on each newly dirtied folio: it bumps i_wrbuffer_ref (taking an ihold() on the 0->1 transition) and attaches the snap_context to folio->private. That claim is released only by ceph_put_wrbuffer_cap_refs(), which for a submitted write runs from writepages_finish(). In ceph_submit_write(), if ceph_inc_osd_stopping_blocker() fails -- which happens during umount -- the request is aborted before submission: the already-collected folios are only redirtied and unlocked, so writepages_finish() never runs and the claim is leaked. redirty_page_for_writepage() -> folio_redirty_for_writepage() -> filemap_dirty_folio() sets PG_dirty directly and does not go through ->dirty_folio, so ceph_dirty_folio() is not re-entered to rebalance it. Because every subsequent writeback also fails the osd_stopping_blocker, i_wrbuffer_ref never returns to 0, the ihold() is never dropped, and the inode cannot be evicted: VFS: Busy inodes after unmount of ceph kernel BUG at fs/super.c:650! Release the orphaned claim in the abort path before redirtying, via ceph_undo_wrbuffer_claim(): detach the snap_context, drop the wrbuffer reference (letting i_wrbuffer_ref reach 0 and iput() the inode), and drop the snap_context reference -- i.e. do what writepages_finish() would have done for these never-submitted folios. Only the locked_pages entries are undone; folios still in the fbatch were never dirty-cleared by this call (folio_clear_dirty_for_io() is the ownership-transfer point, and a successful move NULLs the fbatch slot), so they hold no claim this call owns.

The advisory is shared at git.kernel.org. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2026-89646 since 09/11/2026. The exploitability is told to be easy. An attack has to be approached locally. Additional levels of successful authentication are required for exploitation. It demands that the victim is doing some kind of user interaction. Technical details are known, but no exploit is available.

Upgrading to version 6.18.50, 7.2.4 or 7.3-rc1 eliminates this vulnerability. Applying the patch ec32015a955c5d326c5e26610edfdcccd52f2314/ac7a5a5385762df458d10cccc086a4e079be7409/c25aee9c630fb86f98d79eccb75765067079b972 is able to eliminate this problem. The best possible mitigation is suggested to be upgrading to the latest version.

If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Productinfo

Type

Vendor

Name

Version

License

Website

CPE 2.3info

CPE 2.2info

CVSSv4info

VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CVSSv3info

VulDB Meta Base Score: 4.2
VulDB Meta Temp Score: 4.0

VulDB Base Score: 4.2
VulDB Temp Score: 4.0
VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CVSSv2info

AVACAuCIA
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
VectorComplexityAuthenticationConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

VulDB Base Score: 🔒
VulDB Temp Score: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

Exploitinginfo

Class: Denial of service
CWE: CWE-404
CAPEC: 🔒
ATT&CK: 🔒

Physical: Partially
Local: Yes
Remote: Partially

Availability: 🔒
Status: Not defined
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔒

0-DayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
TodayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

Threat Intelligenceinfo

Interest: 🔍
Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍

Countermeasuresinfo

Recommended: Upgrade
Status: 🔍

0-Day Time: 🔒

Upgrade: Kernel 6.18.50/7.2.4/7.3-rc1
Patch: ec32015a955c5d326c5e26610edfdcccd52f2314/ac7a5a5385762df458d10cccc086a4e079be7409/c25aee9c630fb86f98d79eccb75765067079b972

Timelineinfo

09/11/2026 CVE reserved
09/12/2026 +1 days Advisory disclosed
09/12/2026 +0 days VulDB entry created
09/12/2026 +0 days VulDB entry last update

Sourcesinfo

Vendor: kernel.org

Advisory: git.kernel.org
Status: Confirmed

CVE: CVE-2026-89646 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2026-89646
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-402957

Entryinfo

Created: 09/12/2026 02:09
Changes: 09/12/2026 02:09 (59)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103

If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Discussion

No comments yet. Languages: en.

Please log in to comment.

Do you want to use VulDB in your project?

Use the official API to access entries easily!