VulnerabilityAwaiting classification

CVE-2026-63813

HIGH · 7.8 CVSS v3.1 Developing Published 2026-07-19
No fix yet
No fix has been published. The vendor has not shipped a fixed release or patch. You remain exposed.
See remediation →
80/100
Remediation priority · High
Zero-click 5 weeks old

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 · unedited
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: Revert "f2fs: remove non-uptodate folio from the page cache in move_data_block" This reverts commit 9609dd704725a40cd63d915f2ab6c44248a44598. The kernel panics are keeping to be reported especially when the f2fs partition get almost full. By investigation, we find that the reason is one f2fs page got freed to buddy without being deleted from LRU and the root cause is the race happened in [2] which is enrolled by this commit. There are 3 race processes in this scenario, please find below for their main activities. The changed code in move_data_block() lets the GC path evict the tail-end folio from the page cache through folio_end_dropbehind(). Once folio_unmap_invalidate() removes the folio from mapping->i_pages, the page-cache references for all pages in the folio are dropped. The folio is then kept alive only by temporary external references, which allows a later split to operate on a folio whose subpages are no longer protected by page-cache references. After the page-cache references are gone, split_folio_to_order() can split the big folio into individual pages and put the resulting subpages back on the LRU. For tail pages beyond EOF, split removes them from the page cache and drops their page-cache references. A tail page can then remain on the LRU with PG_lru set while holding only the split caller's temporary reference. When free_folio_and_swap_cache() drops that final reference, the page enters the final folio_put() release path. In parallel, folio_isolate_lru() can observe the same tail page with a non-zero refcount and PG_lru set. It clears PG_lru before taking its own reference. If this races with the final folio_put() from the split path, __folio_put() sees PG_lru already cleared and skips lruvec_del_folio(). The page is then freed back to the allocator while its lru links are still present in the LRU list. A later LRU operation on a neighboring page detects the stale link and reports list corruption. [1] [ 22.486082] list_del corruption. next->prev should be fffffffec10e0ac8, but was dead000000000122. (next=fffffffec10e0a88) [ 22.486130] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 22.486134] kernel BUG at lib/list_debug.c:67! [ 22.486141] Internal error: Oops - BUG: 00000000f2000800 [#1] SMP [ 22.488502] Tainted: [W]=WARN, [O]=OOT_MODULE [ 22.488506] Hardware name: Spreadtrum UMS9230 1H10 SoC (DT) [ 22.488511] pstate: 604000c5 (nZCv daIF +PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--) [ 22.488517] pc : __list_del_entry_valid_or_report+0x14c/0x154 [ 22.488531] lr : __list_del_entry_valid_or_report+0x14c/0x154 [ 22.488539] sp : ffffffc08006b830 [ 22.488542] x29: ffffffc08006b868 x28: 0000000000003020 x27: 0000000000000000 [ 22.488553] x26: 0000000000000000 x25: 0000000000000004 x24: fffffffec10e0ac0 [ 22.488564] x23: 00000000000000e8 x22: 0000000000000024 x21: dead000000000122 [ 22.488574] x20: fffffffec10e0a88 x19: fffffffec10e0ac8 x18: ffffffc080061060 [ 22.488585] x17: 20747562202c3863 x16: 6130653031636566 x15: 0000000000000058 [ 22.488595] x14: 0000000000000004 x13: ffffff80f91e0000 x12: 0000000000000003 [ 22.488605] x11: 0000000000000003 x10: 0000000000000001 x9 : ffe85721f0e25f00 [ 22.488615] x8 : ffe85721f0e25f00 x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : 6c65645f7473696c [ 22.488625] x5 : ffffffed39b23026 x4 : 0000000000000000 x3 : 0000000000000010 [ 22.488636] x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : 0000000000000000 x0 : 000000000000006d [ 22.488647] Call trace: [ 22.488651] __list_del_entry_valid_or_report+0x14c/0x154 (P) [ 22.488661] __folio_put+0x2bc/0x434 [ 22.488670] folio_put+0x28/0x58 [ 22.488678] do_garbage_collect+0x1a34/0x2584 [ 22.488689] f2fs_gc+0x230/0x9b4 [ 22.488697] f2fs_fallocate+0xb90/0xdf4 [ 22.488706] vfs_fallocate+0x1b4/0x2bc [ 22.488716] __arm64_sys_fallocate+0x44/0x78 [ 22.488725] invoke_syscall+0x58/0xe4 [ 22.488732] do_el0_svc+0x48/0xdc [ 22.488739] el0 ---truncated---

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 analysis · low confidence
Developing — this CVE was published recently and its authoritative NVD entry is still being established, so we're holding a technical summary until the source data settles rather than publish something unreliable. Re-checking after 2026-08-02.

CVSS 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.

From vendor data
No vendor fix exists The vendor has not published a patch for this.

There is no version to upgrade to and no patch to apply. Every affected install stays exposed until the vendor ships a fix — or somebody else builds one.

Add your voice

Free. We build fixes in the order the community asks for them — and we’ll tell you the moment this one lands.

Can’t wait

We develop and verify an original fix where the vendor hasn’t, from $1,950. Deployed to your staging first — never straight to production.

Scope it with us

See what else the community needs solved on the solutions-needed board.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-63813 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-63813 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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