Red Hot Cyber
Cybersecurity, Cybercrime News and Vulnerability Analysis

CVE-2026-90042

View the latest critical CVEs issued
This is a free service offered by Red Hot Cyber to the community. It allows you to view, on a single page, information about a single CVE from the National Vulnerability Database (NVD) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of the United States of America, the Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams (FIRST) regarding the EPSS score and percentile, data from the KEV catalog of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), as well as selected resources from Red Hot Cyber and other international sources.

National Vulnerability Database Information

Description: 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.

CVSS Base Score: 9.8 (v3.1)

The CVSS Base Score is a score from 0 to 10 that represents the intrinsic severity of a vulnerability. A higher score indicates greater severity.

Value
0.02.55.07.510.0
Published on: 09/16/2026 11:17:17
Last modified: 09/16/2026 15:18:26
NIST: CVE source from the National Vulnerability Database (NVD)

CVSS Metrics Details

  • Base Severity: CRITICAL
  • Attack Vector: NETWORK
  • Attack Complexity: LOW
  • Privileges Required: NONE
  • User Interaction: NONE
  • Scope: UNCHANGED
  • Confidentiality Impact: HIGH
  • Integrity Impact: HIGH
  • Availability Impact: HIGH

FIRST Information

EPSS Score: 0.0049

The EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a score from 0 to 1 that indicates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the real world in the next 30 days. A higher value indicates a greater likelihood of exploitation.

Value
0.00.250.50.751.0

Percentile: 0.4130

The Percentile indicates how much higher this vulnerability's EPSS score is compared to all other vulnerabilities in the EPSS database. For example, a percentile of 0.90 (90%) means that 90% of vulnerabilities have an EPSS score equal to or lower than the current one.

Value
0.00.250.50.751.0

*Data updated as of: 2026-09-18


CISA Information (Known Exploited Vulnerabilities)

The CISA KEV Catalog lists vulnerabilities that have been actively exploited in the real world. If a CVE is present in this catalog, it indicates that the threat is immediate and mitigation should be a top priority.

CVE CVE-2026-90042 is not present in the CISA KEV Catalog. This indicates that it is not currently classified by CISA as an actively exploited vulnerability.


Articles published on Red Hot Cyber

No articles present on Red Hot Cyber.


Exploit PoC from GitHub

No results found on GitHub for this CVE.