CVE-2026-72203

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ntfs: skip extent mft records in writeback to prevent deadlock This patch fixes the ABBA deadlock between extent_lock and extent mrec_lock triggered by xfstests generic/113, that occurs since the commit 6994acf33bae ("ntfs: use base mft_no when looking up base inode for extent record"). Path A (inode writeback): VFS writeback -> ntfs_write_inode() -> __ntfs_write_inode() -> mutex_lock(&ni->extent_lock) -> mutex_lock(&tni->mrec_lock) Path B (MFT folio writeback): VFS writeback of $MFT dirty folios -> ntfs_mft_writepages() -> ntfs_write_mft_block() -> ntfs_may_write_mft_record() -> holds one extent mrec_lock from a previous iteration -> tries to acquire another base inode extent_lock By removing all extent_lock and extent mrec_lock acquisition from the MFT folio writeback path, the ABBA lock ordering is eliminated: Path A: __ntfs_write_inode(): extent_lock -> mrec_lock Path B (removed): ntfs_write_mft_block(): mrec_lock -> extent_lock Path B is always redundant for extent records because: 1. mark_mft_record_dirty(ext_ni) does NOT dirty the MFT folio. It only sets NInoDirty(ext_ni) and marks the base VFS inode dirty via __mark_inode_dirty(I_DIRTY_DATASYNC), which triggers Path A. Therefore, normal extent modifications never create a situation where the MFT folio is dirty and Path B is not scheduled. 2. The MFT folio only gets dirtied via ntfs_mft_mark_dirty() inside ntfs_mft_record_alloc(). But all identified callers in attrib.c (ntfs_attr_add, ntfs_attr_record_move_away, ntfs_attr_make_non_resident, ntfs_attr_record_resize) follow through with mark_mft_record_dirty(), which triggers Path A to write the complete record. 3. ntfs_evict_big_inode() calls ntfs_commit_inode() before freeing extent inodes, ensuring all dirty extents are flushed via Path A before the base inode leaves the icache.

At a glance

Exploitability

Can be exploited over the network without logging in. High risk of service disruption.

Exploit odds

0.6% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).

Fix

No patch or advisory is linked yet. Look at mitigations or restrict exposure.

Timeline

1. 2026-08-09 03:40 UTC ReservedThe CVE id was reserved by its CNA
2. 2026-08-15 06:21 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
3. 2026-10-30 13:19 UTC Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

• Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
• Exploit odds: 0.6% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
• Severity: 7.5 HIGH (CVSS).
• Fix: none linked yet, which raises it.

Details

Published

2026-08-15 06:21 UTC

Last modified

2026-10-30 13:19 UTC

Exploit probability

0.6% · EPSS, next 30 days

Record status

Received

Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 7.5

Attack vector

Network

Complexity

Low

Privileges needed

None

User interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

None

Integrity

None

Availability

High

Is it in your code?

Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.

Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2026-72203.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2026-72203. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.

Copy as ticket · More options · Status badge