CVE-2026-46066
Linux Kernel 6.6 – 6.18.30
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-46066 is a medium-severity Off-by-one Error (CWE-193) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 2th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-32448
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ceph: fix num_ops off-by-one when crypto allocation fails move_dirty_folio_in_page_array() may fail if the file is encrypted, the dirty folio is not the first in the batch, and it fails to…
more
allocate a bounce buffer to hold the ciphertext. When that happens, ceph_process_folio_batch() simply redirties the folio and flushes the current batch -- it can retry that folio in a future batch. However, if this failed folio is not contiguous with the last folio that did make it into the batch, then ceph_process_folio_batch() has already incremented `ceph_wbc->num_ops`; because it doesn't follow through and add the discontiguous folio to the array, ceph_submit_write() -- which expects that `ceph_wbc->num_ops` accurately reflects the number of contiguous ranges (and therefore the required number of "write extent" ops) in the writeback -- will panic the kernel: BUG_ON(ceph_wbc->op_idx + 1 != req->r_num_ops); This issue can be reproduced on affected kernels by writing to fscrypt-enabled CephFS file(s) with a 4KiB-written/4KiB-skipped/repeat pattern (total filesize should not matter) and gradually increasing the system's memory pressure until a bounce buffer allocation fails. Fix this crash by decrementing `ceph_wbc->num_ops` back to the correct value when move_dirty_folio_in_page_array() fails, but the folio already started counting a new (i.e. still-empty) extent. The defect corrected by this patch has existed since 2022 (see first `Fixes:`), but another bug blocked multi-folio encrypted writeback until recently (see second `Fixes:`). The second commit made it into 6.18.16, 6.19.6, and 7.0-rc1, unmasking the panic in those versions. This patch therefore fixes a regression (panic) introduced by cac190c7674f.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V6.2.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover off-by-one errors in loops, bounds, and calculations before deployment.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can embed bounds-checking and arithmetic-correctness rules that stop off-by-one mistakes at introduction.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices directly prevent off-by-one errors via reviews, static analysis, and testing.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development and acceptance can detect off-by-one errors before release.
Secure development life cycle includes requirements and reviews that can catch off-by-one errors.
Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and input validation to prevent off-by-one errors.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles promote defensive coding practices that reduce off-by-one mistakes.
Secure coding directly addresses off-by-one errors through coding standards and peer review.