CVE-2026-23233
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: f2fs: fix to avoid mapping wrong physical block for swapfile Xiaolong Guo reported a f2fs bug in bugzilla [1] [1] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=220951 Quoted: "When using stress-ng's swap stress test on F2FS filesystem with kernel 6.6+, the system experiences data corruption leading to either: 1 dm-verity corruption errors and device reboot 2 F2FS node corruption errors and boot hangs The issue occurs specifically when: 1 Using F2FS filesystem (ext4 is unaffected) 2 Swapfile size is less than F2FS section size (2MB) 3 Swapfile has fragmented physical layout (multiple non-contiguous extents) 4 Kernel version is 6.6+ (6.1 is unaffected) The root cause is in check_swap_activate() function in fs/f2fs/data.c. When the first extent of a small swapfile (< 2MB) is not aligned to section boundaries, the function incorrectly treats it as the last extent, failing to map subsequent extents. This results in incorrect swap_extent creation where only the first extent is mapped, causing subsequent swap writes to overwrite wrong physical locations (other files' data). Steps to Reproduce 1 Setup a device with F2FS-formatted userdata partition 2 Compile stress-ng from https://github.com/ColinIanKing/stress-ng 3 Run swap stress test: (Android devices) adb shell "cd /data/stressng; ./stress-ng-64 --metrics-brief --timeout 60 --swap 0" Log: 1 Ftrace shows in kernel 6.6, only first extent is mapped during second f2fs_map_blocks call in check_swap_activate(): stress-ng-swap-8990: f2fs_map_blocks: ino=11002, file offset=0, start blkaddr=0x43143, len=0x1 (Only 4KB mapped, not the full swapfile) 2 in kernel 6.1, both extents are correctly mapped: stress-ng-swap-5966: f2fs_map_blocks: ino=28011, file offset=0, start blkaddr=0x13cd4, len=0x1 stress-ng-swap-5966: f2fs_map_blocks: ino=28011, file offset=1, start blkaddr=0x60c84b, len=0xff The problematic code is in check_swap_activate(): if ((pblock - SM_I(sbi)->main_blkaddr) % blks_per_sec || nr_pblocks % blks_per_sec || !f2fs_valid_pinned_area(sbi, pblock)) { bool last_extent = false; not_aligned++; nr_pblocks = roundup(nr_pblocks, blks_per_sec); if (cur_lblock + nr_pblocks > sis->max) nr_pblocks -= blks_per_sec; /* this extent is last one */ if (!nr_pblocks) { nr_pblocks = last_lblock - cur_lblock; last_extent = true; } ret = f2fs_migrate_blocks(inode, cur_lblock, nr_pblocks); if (ret) { if (ret == -ENOENT) ret = -EINVAL; goto out; } if (!last_extent) goto retry; } When the first extent is unaligned and roundup(nr_pblocks, blks_per_sec) exceeds sis->max, we subtract blks_per_sec resulting in nr_pblocks = 0. The code then incorrectly assumes this is the last extent, sets nr_pblocks = last_lblock - cur_lblock (entire swapfile), and performs migration. After migration, it doesn't retry mapping, so subsequent extents are never processed. " In order to fix this issue, we need to lookup block mapping info after we migrate all blocks in the tail of swapfile.
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 analysisThe program writes past the bounds of a buffer, overwriting adjacent memory an attacker can turn to their advantage. Crafted input can overwrite control data and redirect execution. Remediation is validating every index and length before a write, plus modern memory-safety mitigations.
General guidance for the out-of-bounds write 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>= 6.6.33, < 6.6.127>= 6.9, < 6.12.74>= 6.13, < 6.18.13>= 6.19, < 6.19.3CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 · scoped6.6.1276.12.746.18.13
Linux Kernel 6.6.127 (or 6.12.74, 6.18.13, or 6.19.3 depending on your branch)
- Identify the currently running Linux kernel version using `uname -r`
- Determine which version range your current kernel falls into from the affected versions: 6.6.33-6.6.126, 6.9-6.12.73, 6.13-6.18.12, or 6.19.0-6.19.2
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to one of the fixed versions: 6.6.127, 6.12.74, 6.18.13, or 6.19.3 (or later stable release)
- Reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version with `uname -r`
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-2026-23233 — 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-2026-23233 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