CVE-2026-72472

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: nfs: use nfsi->rwsem to protect traversal of the file lock list Lingfeng identified a bug and suggested two solutions, but both appear to have issues. Generally, we cannot release flc_lock while iterating over the file lock list to avoid use-after-free (UAF) problems with file locks. However, functions like nfs_delegation_claim_locks and nfs4_reclaim_locks cannot adhere to this rule because recover_lock or nfs4_lock_delegation_recall may take a long time. To resolve this, NFS switches to using nfsi->rwsem for the same protection, and nfs_reclaim_locks follows this approach. Although nfs_delegation_claim_locks uses so_delegreturn_mutex instead, this is inadequate since a single inode can have multiple nfs4_state instances. Therefore, the fix is to also use nfsi->rwsem in this case. Furthermore, after commit c69899a17ca4 ("NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update"), the functions nfs4_locku_done and nfs4_lock_done also break this rule because they call locks_lock_inode_wait without holding nfsi->rwsem. Simply adding this protection could cause many deadlocks, so instead, the call to locks_lock_inode_wait is moved into _nfs4_proc_setlk. Regarding the bug fixed by commit c69899a17ca4 ("NFSv4: Update of VFS byte range lock must be atomic with the stateid update"), it has been resolved after commit 0460253913e5 ("NFSv4: nfs4_do_open() is incorrectly triggering state recovery") because all slots are drained before calling nfs4_do_reclaim, which prevents concurrent stateid changes along this path. Also, nfs_delegation_claim_locks does not cause this concurrency either since when _nfs4_proc_setlk is called with NFS_DELEGATED_STATE, no RPC is sent, so nfs4_lock_done is not called. Therefore, nfs4_lock_delegation_recall from nfs_delegation_claim_locks is the first time the stateid is set.

At a glance

Exploitability

Can be exploited over the network without logging in. High risk of data exposure, data tampering, service disruption.

Exploit odds

0.7% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).

Fix

A patch, advisory or fixed version is referenced. Upgrade or apply it.

Timeline

1. 2026-08-15 06:22 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
2. 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: 0.7% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
• Severity: 9.8 CRITICAL (CVSS).
• Fix: a patch or advisory is linked.

Details

Published

2026-08-15 06:22 UTC

Last modified

2026-10-30 13:19 UTC

Exploit probability

0.7% · EPSS, next 30 days

Record status

Received

Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 9.8

Attack vector

Network

Complexity

Low

Privileges needed

None

User interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

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-2026-72472.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2026-72472. 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