VulnerabilityPublished 15 Aug 2026Updated 19 Oct 2026

CVE-2026-72108: Linux kernel · dm thin metadata: fix metadata snapshot consistency on commit failure

Affects Linux kernelSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.8 High · fixed in b5f9a31c51cbb374a1713c3494f8660ab070f035 : patch Linux kernel soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:24 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.8High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS

0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 17% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

Exploitation: No evidence of active exploitation and no public proof of concept
Automatable: Attackers cannot reliably automate steps 1–4 of the kill chain
Technical impact: Total control over the software or total information disclosure

CISA SSVC assessment, 2026-10-16.

Patch

Available – fixed in b5f9a31c51cbb374a1713c3494f8660ab070f035, abf2fae92cbe68945028987d498cc72f8f0e23a8, 9f1a0d27586ceab055e6b050e3731ce3c6b2c4f0 +5

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: High

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 15 Aug 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade to a fixed release listed under Affected software.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 991d9fa02da0dd1f843dc011376965e0c8c6c9b5, < b5f9a31c51cbb374a1713c3494f8660ab070f035	Fixed in b5f9a31c51cbb374a1713c3494f8660ab070f035
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 991d9fa02da0dd1f843dc011376965e0c8c6c9b5, < abf2fae92cbe68945028987d498cc72f8f0e23a8	Fixed in abf2fae92cbe68945028987d498cc72f8f0e23a8
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 991d9fa02da0dd1f843dc011376965e0c8c6c9b5, < 9f1a0d27586ceab055e6b050e3731ce3c6b2c4f0	Fixed in 9f1a0d27586ceab055e6b050e3731ce3c6b2c4f0
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 991d9fa02da0dd1f843dc011376965e0c8c6c9b5, < 7f76245960a332f39b08cc556e675d1765dc5bbb	Fixed in 7f76245960a332f39b08cc556e675d1765dc5bbb
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 991d9fa02da0dd1f843dc011376965e0c8c6c9b5, < 5efb1a7734ed4035fa4fdc3716bdb84621f27cf6	Fixed in 5efb1a7734ed4035fa4fdc3716bdb84621f27cf6
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 991d9fa02da0dd1f843dc011376965e0c8c6c9b5, < 5bcd4d3058ebaf46ad2e163829d87dd4870c7a45	Fixed in 5bcd4d3058ebaf46ad2e163829d87dd4870c7a45

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: dm thin metadata: fix metadata snapshot consistency on commit failure __reserve_metadata_snap() and __release_metadata_snap() modify the superblock's held_root directly in the block_manager's buffer. If the subsequent metadata commit fails, the held_root gets flushed to disk through the abort_transaction path, resulting in inconsistent metadata. Reproducer 1: __reserve_metadata_snap() 1. Create a 2 MiB metadata device and make the region after the 14th block inaccessible, to trigger metadata commit failure in the subsequent reserve_metadata_snap operation. The 14th block will be the shadow destination for the index block. dmsetup create tmeta --table "0 112 linear /dev/sdc 0 112 3984 error" 2. Create a 16 MiB thin-pool dmsetup create tdata --table "0 32768 zero" dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/mapper/tmeta bs=4k count=1 dmsetup create tpool --table "0 32768 thin-pool /dev/mapper/tmeta \ /dev/mapper/tdata 128 0 1 skip_block_zeroing" 3. Take a metadata snapshot to trigger metadata commit failure and transaction abort. However, the held_root is written to disk, breaking metadata consistency. dmsetup message tpool 0 "reserve_metadata_snap" thin_check v1.2.2 result: Bad reference count for metadata block 6. Expected 2, but space map contains 1. Bad reference count for metadata block 7. Expected 2, but space map contains 1. Bad reference count for metadata block 13. Expected 1, but space map contains 0. Reproducer 2: __release_metadata_snap() 1. Create a 2 MiB metadata device and make the region after the 16th block inaccessible, to trigger metadata commit failure in the subsequent release_metadata_snap operation. The 16th block will be the shadow destination for the index block. dmsetup create tmeta --table "0 128 linear /dev/sdc 0 128 3968 error" 2. Create a 16 MiB thin-pool dmsetup create tdata --table "0 32768 zero" dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/mapper/tmeta bs=4k count=1 dmsetup create tpool --table "0 32768 thin-pool /dev/mapper/tmeta \ /dev/mapper/tdata 128 0 1 skip_block_zeroing" 3. Reserve then release the metadata snapshot, to trigger metadata commit failure and transaction abort. The held_root gets removed from the on-disk superblock, causing inconsistent metadata. dmsetup message tpool 0 "reserve_metadata_snap" dmsetup message tpool 0 "release_metadata_snap" thin_check v1.2.2 result: Bad reference count for metadata block 6. Expected 1, but space map contains 2. Bad reference count for metadata block 7. Expected 1, but space map contains 2. 1 metadata blocks have leaked. Fix by deferring the held_root update to commit time. Additionally, move the existing-snapshot check in __reserve_metadata_snap before the shadow operation to avoid unnecessary work. In __release_metadata_snap, clear pmd->held_root before btree deletion so partial failure leaks blocks rather than leaving a stale reference, and unlock the snapshot block before decrementing its refcount.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

WeaknessesCWE-672

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats