Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2022-49850
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nilfs2: fix deadlock in nilfs_count_free_blocks() A semaphore deadlock can occur if nilfs_get_block() detects metadata corruption while locating data blocks and a superblock writeback occurs at the same time: task 1 task 2 ------ ------ * A file operation * nilfs_truncate() nilfs_get_block() down_read(rwsem A) <-- nilfs_bmap_lookup_contig() ... generic_shutdown_super() nilfs_put_super() * Prepare to write superblock * down_write(rwsem B) <-- nilfs_cleanup_super() * Detect b-tree corruption * nilfs_set_log_cursor() nilfs_bmap_convert_error() nilfs_count_free_blocks() __nilfs_error() down_read(rwsem A) <-- nilfs_set_error() down_write(rwsem B) <-- *** DEADLOCK *** Here, nilfs_get_block() readlocks rwsem A (= NILFS_MDT(dat_inode)->mi_sem) and then calls nilfs_bmap_lookup_contig(), but if it fails due to metadata corruption, __nilfs_error() is called from nilfs_bmap_convert_error() inside the lock section. Since __nilfs_error() calls nilfs_set_error() unless the filesystem is read-only and nilfs_set_error() attempts to writelock rwsem B (= nilfs->ns_sem) to write back superblock exclusively, hierarchical lock acquisition occurs in the order rwsem A -> rwsem B. Now, if another task starts updating the superblock, it may writelock rwsem B during the lock sequence above, and can deadlock trying to readlock rwsem A in nilfs_count_free_blocks(). However, there is actually no need to take rwsem A in nilfs_count_free_blocks() because it, within the lock section, only reads a single integer data on a shared struct with nilfs_sufile_get_ncleansegs(). This has been the case after commit aa474a220180 ("nilfs2: add local variable to cache the number of clean segments"), that is, even before this bug was introduced. So, this resolves the deadlock problem by just not taking the semaphore in nilfs_count_free_blocks().
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisShared resources are accessed without correct locking, so concurrent operations interleave into inconsistent — and sometimes exploitable — states, or deadlock the service outright. These bugs are subtle and timing-dependent. The fix is correct, consistent locking or atomic operations around every shared resource.
General guidance for the improper locking class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
Linux KernelOperating system
>= 2.6.38, < 4.9.334>= 4.10, < 4.14.300>= 4.15, < 4.19.267>= 4.20, < 5.4.225>= 5.5, < 5.10.155>= 5.11, < 5.15.79>= 5.16, < 6.0.9= 6.1CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped4.9.3344.14.3004.19.267
5.4.225 or later (or 4.9.334/4.14.300/4.19.267 for respective older branches)
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 5.4.225 or later
- For users on older stable branches, upgrade to: 4.9.334 (for 4.9.x), 4.14.300 (for 4.14.x), or 4.19.267 (for 4.19.x)
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-49850 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-49850 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data