CVE-2022-50435
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: ext4: avoid crash when inline data creation follows DIO write When inode is created and written to using direct IO, there is nothing to clear the EXT4_STATE_MAY_INLINE_DATA flag. Thus when inode gets truncated later to say 1 byte and written using normal write, we will try to store the data as inline data. This confuses the code later because the inode now has both normal block and inline data allocated and the confusion manifests for example as: kernel BUG at fs/ext4/inode.c:2721! invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN CPU: 0 PID: 359 Comm: repro Not tainted 5.19.0-rc8-00001-g31ba1e3b8305-dirty #15 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.16.0-1.fc36 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:ext4_writepages+0x363d/0x3660 RSP: 0018:ffffc90000ccf260 EFLAGS: 00010293 RAX: ffffffff81e1abcd RBX: 0000008000000000 RCX: ffff88810842a180 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000008000000000 RDI: 0000000000000000 RBP: ffffc90000ccf650 R08: ffffffff81e17d58 R09: ffffed10222c680b R10: dfffe910222c680c R11: 1ffff110222c680a R12: ffff888111634128 R13: ffffc90000ccf880 R14: 0000008410000000 R15: 0000000000000001 FS: 00007f72635d2640(0000) GS:ffff88811b000000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000565243379180 CR3: 000000010aa74000 CR4: 0000000000150eb0 Call Trace: <TASK> do_writepages+0x397/0x640 filemap_fdatawrite_wbc+0x151/0x1b0 file_write_and_wait_range+0x1c9/0x2b0 ext4_sync_file+0x19e/0xa00 vfs_fsync_range+0x17b/0x190 ext4_buffered_write_iter+0x488/0x530 ext4_file_write_iter+0x449/0x1b90 vfs_write+0xbcd/0xf40 ksys_write+0x198/0x2c0 __x64_sys_write+0x7b/0x90 do_syscall_64+0x3d/0x90 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd </TASK> Fix the problem by clearing EXT4_STATE_MAY_INLINE_DATA when we are doing direct IO write to a file.
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 analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
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>= 5.5, < 5.10.150>= 5.11, < 5.15.75>= 5.16, < 5.19.17>= 6.0, < 6.0.3CVSS 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 · scoped5.10.1505.15.755.19.17
Kernel >= 6.0.3 (or the appropriate stable branch: 5.10.150+, 5.15.75+, or 5.19.17+ depending on your current branch)
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to a version that includes the fix for CVE-2022-50435
- The fix clears EXT4_STATE_MAY_INLINE_DATA when performing direct I/O writes to prevent the kernel crash described in the vulnerability
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-2022-50435 — 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-2022-50435 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