Vulnerability Database

374,559

Total vulnerabilities in the database

CVE-2026-31448 — linux / linux_kernel

Loop with Unreachable Exit Condition ('Infinite Loop')

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

ext4: avoid infinite loops caused by residual data

On the mkdir/mknod path, when mapping logical blocks to physical blocks, if inserting a new extent into the extent tree fails (in this example, because the file system disabled the huge file feature when marking the inode as dirty), ext4_ext_map_blocks() only calls ext4_free_blocks() to reclaim the physical block without deleting the corresponding data in the extent tree. This causes subsequent mkdir operations to reference the previously reclaimed physical block number again, even though this physical block is already being used by the xattr block. Therefore, a situation arises where both the directory and xattr are using the same buffer head block in memory simultaneously.

The above causes ext4_xattr_block_set() to enter an infinite loop about "inserted" and cannot release the inode lock, ultimately leading to the 143s blocking problem mentioned in [1].

If the metadata is corrupted, then trying to remove some extent space can do even more harm. Also in case EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_DELALLOC_RESERVE was passed, remove space wrongly update quota information. Jan Kara suggests distinguishing between two cases:

  1. The error is ENOSPC or EDQUOT - in this case the filesystem is fully consistent and we must maintain its consistency including all the accounting. However these errors can happen only early before we've inserted the extent into the extent tree. So current code works correctly for this case.

  2. Some other error - this means metadata is corrupted. We should strive to do as few modifications as possible to limit damage. So I'd just skip freeing of allocated blocks.

[1] INFO: task syz.0.17:5995 blocked for more than 143 seconds. Call Trace: inode_lock_nested include/linux/fs.h:1073 [inline] __start_dirop fs/namei.c:2923 [inline] start_dirop fs/namei.c:2934 [inline]

  • Published: Apr 22, 2026
  • Updated: Apr 28, 2026
  • CVE: CVE-2026-31448
  • Severity: Critical
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: Critical
  • Score: 9.4
  • AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H

CWEs:

Frequently Asked Questions

A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.

CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.

A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.

Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.

Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.

SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.