CVE-2026-72166

UNRATEDCVSS · not yet scoredTrending — 5 sources updated this week
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorLow exploitation likelihood right now — keep watching.
  • No CVSS published and no exploitation signals yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0%CVSS v2: Exploit: None knownExposed: 0

No vendor fix yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for a patch.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

net/9p: fix infinite loop in p9_client_rpc on fatal signal

When p9_client_rpc() is called with type P9_TFLUSH and the transport has no peer (e.g. fd transport backed by pipes with no 9p server), a fatal signal causes an infinite loop:

again: err = io_wait_event_killable(req->wq, ...) /* SIGKILL wakes the task, returns -ERESTARTSYS */

if (err == -ERESTARTSYS && c->status == Connected && type == P9_TFLUSH) { sigpending = 1; clear_thread_flag(TIF_SIGPENDING); goto again; }

clear_thread_flag() clears TIF_SIGPENDING before jumping back to io_wait_event_killable(). signal_pending_state() checks TIF_SIGPENDING, finds it zero, and the task goes to sleep again. The task can only wake on the next signal delivery that calls signal_wake_up() and sets TIF_SIGPENDING again. When that happens the loop repeats, clears TIF_SIGPENDING, and sleeps again indefinitely.

This is triggered in practice by coredump_wait(): when a thread in a multi-threaded process causes a coredump (e.g. via SIGSYS from Syscall User Dispatch), coredump_wait() sends SIGKILL to all other threads and waits for them to call mm_release(). If one of those threads is blocked in p9_client_rpc() over an fd transport with no peer, it enters the P9_TFLUSH loop and never calls mm_release(), so coredump_wait() stalls forever:

INFO: task syz.0.18:676 blocked for more than 143 seconds. Not tainted 6.12.77+ #1 task:syz.0.18 state:D stack:27600 pid:676 tgid:673 ppid:630 flags:0x00000004 Call Trace: context_switch kernel/sched/core.c:5344 [inline] __schedule+0xcb4/0x5d50 kernel/sched/core.c:6724 __schedule_loop kernel/sched/core.c:6801 [inline] schedule+0xe5/0x350 kernel/sched/core.c:6816 schedule_timeout+0x253/0x290 kernel/time/timer.c:2593 do_wait_for_common kernel/sched/completion.c:95 [inline] __wait_for_common+0x409/0x600 kernel/sched/completion.c:116 wait_for_common kernel/sched/completion.c:127 [inline] wait_for_completion_state+0x1d/0x40 kernel/sched/completion.c:264 coredump_wait fs/coredump.c:448 [inline] do_coredump+0x854/0x4350 fs/coredump.c:629 get_signal+0x1425/0x2730 kernel/signal.c:2903 arch_do_signal_or_restart+0x81/0x880 arch/x86/kernel/signal.c:337 exit_to_user_mode_loop kernel/entry/common.c:111 [inline] exit_to_user_mode_prepare include/linux/entry-common.h:328 [inline] __syscall_exit_to_user_mode_work kernel/entry/common.c:207 [inline] syscall_exit_to_user_mode+0xf9/0x160 kernel/entry/common.c:218 do_syscall_64+0x102/0x220 arch/x86/entry/common.c:84 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f

Fix: check fatal_signal_pending() before clearing TIF_SIGPENDING in the P9_TFLUSH retry loop. At that point TIF_SIGPENDING is still set, so fatal_signal_pending() works correctly. If a fatal signal is pending, jump to recalc_sigpending to restore TIF_SIGPENDING and return -ERESTARTSYS to the caller.

The same defect is present in stable kernels back to 5.4. On those kernels the infinite loop is broken earlier by a second SIGKILL from the parent process (e.g. kill_and_wait() retrying after a timeout), resulting in a zombie process and a shutdown delay rather than a permanent D-state hang, but the underlying flaw is the same.

Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with Syzkaller.

CVSS v3
EchelonGraph score
Not yet assessedNo source has published severity data for this CVE yet — no CVSS score from NVD or a CNA, no GitHub advisory, and it is not in CISA KEV. This is not a rating of zero; we cannot assess it yet.
EG Score
EG Risk
EPSS PROB
0%
EPSS %ILE
11%
KEV
Not listed

Published

August 15, 2026

Last Modified

August 17, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-72166(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 17× in last 7d / 17× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-08-20 13:05 UTCGHSA enrichment
  2. 2026-08-19 17:04 UTCEPSS rescore
  3. 2026-08-18 13:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-08-18 13:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-08-17 13:47 UTCEPSS rescore
  6. 2026-08-17 06:21 UTCGHSA enrichment
  7. 2026-08-17 06:18 UTCNVD update
  8. 2026-08-17 05:32 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-08-17 05:32 UTCGHSA enrichment
  10. 2026-08-17 05:24 UTCMITRE cvelistV5
  11. 2026-08-16 14:56 UTCEPSS rescore
  12. 2026-08-16 14:56 UTCEPSS rescore
  13. 2026-08-16 02:15 UTCEPSS rescore
  14. 2026-08-15 06:41 UTCGHSA enrichment
  15. 2026-08-15 06:23 UTCNVD update
  16. 2026-08-15 06:11 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-08-15 06:02 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-72166?
CVE-2026-72166 is a publicly disclosed vulnerability published on August 15, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/9p: fix infinite loop in p9clientrpc on fatal signal When p9clientrpc() is called with type P9_TFLUSH and the transport has no peer (e.g. fd transport backed by pipes with no 9p server), a fatal signal causes an infinite loop:…
When was CVE-2026-72166 disclosed?
CVE-2026-72166 was first published in the National Vulnerability Database on August 15, 2026, with the most recent update on August 17, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2026-72166 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-72166 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the top 89.0% of all scored CVEs.
How do I remediate CVE-2026-72166?
Patch to the fixed version published by the affected vendor. Where vendor advisories exist for CVE-2026-72166, EchelonGraph cross-links them in the Vendor Advisories panel below — those typically contain the canonical remediation steps, fixed version numbers, and any vendor-specific mitigations.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-72166

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-72166?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.