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()
- 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"
- 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"
- 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()
- 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"
- 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"
- 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.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.8 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-19). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it