CVE-2026-43245

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ntfs: ->d_compare() must not block ... so don't use __getname() there. Switch it (and ntfs_d_hash(), while we are at it) to kmalloc(PATH_MAX, GFP_NOWAIT). Yes, ntfs_d_hash() almost certainly can do with smaller allocations, but let ntfs folks deal with that - keep the allocation size as-is for now. Stop abusing names_cachep in ntfs, period - various uses of that thing in there have nothing to do with pathnames; just use k[mz]alloc() and be done with that. For now let's keep sizes as-in, but AFAICS none of the users actually want PATH_MAX.

Is your site exposed to CVE-2026-43245?

Run a free security scan — no signup, results in seconds.

CVSS v3.1 Score

7.5

HIGH

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

EPSS — Exploit Prediction

0.0006

Probability of exploitation

0.19%

Percentile rank

EPSS estimates the probability that this vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. A higher score means more likely to be exploited.

Affected Products

Vendor	Product	Versions
linux	linux_kernel	6.2 — 6.18.16
linux	linux_kernel	6.19 — 6.19.6

References

Advisories & Patches

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/142c444a395f4d26055c8a4473e228bb86283f1e https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ca2a04e84af79596e5cd9cfe697d5122ec39c8ce https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/fb4b1f969ba01fa1d4088467a02fc1e5f0806710

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-43245? +

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ntfs: ->d_compare() must not block ... so don't use __getname() there. Switch it (and ntfs_d_hash(), while we are at it) to kmalloc(PATH_MAX, GFP_NOWAIT). Yes, ntfs_d_hash() almost certainly can do with smaller allocations, but let ntfs folks deal with that - keep the allocation size as-is for now. Stop abusing names_cachep in ntfs, period - various uses of that thing in there have nothing to do with pathnames; just use k[mz]alloc() and be done with that. For now let's keep sizes as-in, but AFAICS none of the users actually want PATH_MAX. It has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (HIGH).

How severe is CVE-2026-43245? +

CVE-2026-43245 has a CVSS v3.1 score of 7.5 out of 10, rated HIGH. This is a high-severity vulnerability that should be prioritized for patching. The EPSS score is 0.0006, placing it in the 0th percentile for exploitation probability.

What products are affected by CVE-2026-43245? +

CVE-2026-43245 affects products from linux, specifically: linux_kernel. Check the affected products table above for specific version ranges.

How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2026-43245? +

You can use Secably's free Website Scanner to check your website for known vulnerabilities. For infrastructure scanning, use the Port Scanner to identify exposed services that may be affected. Check the vendor advisories linked above for specific patch and version information.

Related Vulnerabilities

CVE-2025-9588 10.0

Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') vulnerability in Iron Mountain Archiving Services Inc. …

CVE-2025-57870 10.0

A SQL Injection vulnerability exists in Esri ArcGIS Server versions 11.3, 11.4 and 11.5 on Windows, Linux and Kubernetes. This …

CVE-2026-48286 10.0

Adobe Campaign Classic (ACC) versions 7.4.3 build 9396 and earlier are affected by an Incorrect Authorization vulnerability that could result …

CVE-2026-13782 10.0

Use after free in Browser in Google Chrome prior to 150.0.7871.47 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer …

CVE-2025-34028 10.0

The Commvault Command Center Innovation Release allows an unauthenticated actor to upload ZIP files that represent install packages that, when …

CVE-2026-48303 10.0

Adobe Campaign Classic (ACC) versions 7.4.3 build 9394 and earlier are affected by an Incorrect Authorization vulnerability that could result …