CVE-2026-45892
is CVE-2026-45892real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.
signals
public sources
Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.
baseline read
auto · not a community verdict
Low signal — verdict needed
Few public signals point to active risk. Whether a scanner hit here is a true or false positive depends on your version and config — community verdicts decide.
Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS
Confirm or dispute →CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ext4: drop extent cache after doing PARTIAL_VALID1 zeroout When splitting an unwritten extent in the middle and converting it to initialized in ext4_split_extent() with the EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT and EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flags set, it could leave a stale unwritten extent. Assume we have an unwritten file and buffered write in the middle of it without dioread_nolock enabled, it will allocate blocks as written extent. 0 A B N [UUUUUUUUUUUU] on-disk extent U: unwritten extent [UUUUUUUUUUUU] extent status tree [--DDDDDDDD--] D: valid data |<- ->| ----> this range needs to be initialized ext4_split_extent() first try to split this extent at B with EXT4_EXT_DATA_PARTIAL_VALID1 and EXT4_EXT_MAY_ZEROOUT flag set, but ext4_split_extent_at() failed to split this extent due to temporary lack of space. It zeroout B to N and leave the entire extent as unwritten. 0 A B N [UUUUUUUUUUUU] on-disk extent [UUUUUUUUUUUU] extent status tree [--DDDDDDDDZZ] Z: zeroed data ext4_split_extent() then try to split this extent at A with EXT4_EXT_DATA_VALID2 flag set. This time, it split successfully and leave an written extent from A to N. 0 A B N [UUWWWWWWWWWW] on-disk extent W: written extent [UUUUUUUUUUUU] extent status tree [--DDDDDDDDZZ] Finally ext4_map_create_blocks() only insert extent A to B to the extent status tree, and leave an stale unwritten extent in the status tree. 0 A B N [UUWWWWWWWWWW] on-disk extent W: written extent [UUWWWWWWWWUU] extent status tree [--DDDDDDDDZZ] Fix this issue by always cached extent status entry after zeroing out the second part.
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45892)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45892"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45892/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-45892"></a>Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.
Community ground truth
Be the first practitioner to weigh in
So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.
🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.
In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?
0 verdictsNo account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.
Field notes & remediation
Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.
No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.