CVE-2025-71183 | btrfs: always detect conflicting inodes when logging inode refs

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: always detect conflicting inodes when logging inode refs After rename exchanging (either with the rename exchange operation or regular renames in multiple non-atomic steps) two inodes and at least one of them is a directory, we can end up with a log tree that contains only of the inodes and after a power failure that can result in an attempt to delete the other inode when it should not because it was not deleted before the power failure. In some case that delete attempt fails when the target inode is a directory that contains a subvolume inside it, since the log replay code is not prepared to deal with directory entries that point to root items (only inode items). 1) We have directories "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B) under the same parent directory; 2) We have a file (inode C) under directory "dir1" (inode A); 3) We have a subvolume inside directory "dir2" (inode B); 4) All these inodes were persisted in a past transaction and we are currently at transaction N; 5) We rename the file (inode C), so at btrfs_log_new_name() we update inode C's last_unlink_trans to N; 6) We get a rename exchange for "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B), so after the exchange "dir1" is inode B and "dir2" is inode A. During the rename exchange we call btrfs_log_new_name() for inodes A and B, but because they are directories, we don't update their last_unlink_trans to N; 7) An fsync against the file (inode C) is done, and because its inode has a last_unlink_trans with a value of N we log its parent directory (inode A) (through btrfs_log_all_parents(), called from btrfs_log_inode_parent()). 8) So we end up with inode B not logged, which now has the old name of inode A. At copy_inode_items_to_log(), when logging inode A, we did not check if we had any conflicting inode to log because inode A has a generation lower than the current transaction (created in a past transaction); 9) After a power failure, when replaying the log tree, since we find that inode A has a new name that conflicts with the name of inode B in the fs tree, we attempt to delete inode B... this is wrong since that directory was never deleted before the power failure, and because there is a subvolume inside that directory, attempting to delete it will fail since replay_dir_deletes() and btrfs_unlink_inode() are not prepared to deal with dir items that point to roots instead of inodes. When that happens the mount fails and we get a stack trace like the following: [87.2314] BTRFS info (device dm-0): start tree-log replay [87.2318] BTRFS critical (device dm-0): failed to delete reference to subvol, root 5 inode 256 parent 259 [87.2332] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [87.2338] BTRFS: Transaction aborted (error -2) [87.2346] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 638968 at fs/btrfs/inode.c:4345 __btrfs_unlink_inode+0x416/0x440 [btrfs] [87.2368] Modules linked in: btrfs loop dm_thin_pool (...) [87.2470] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 638968 Comm: mount Tainted: G W 6.18.0-rc7-btrfs-next-218+ #2 PREEMPT(full) [87.2489] Tainted: [W]=WARN [87.2494] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.16.2-0-gea1b7a073390-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 [87.2514] RIP: 0010:__btrfs_unlink_inode+0x416/0x440 [btrfs] [87.2538] Code: c0 89 04 24 (...) [87.2568] RSP: 0018:ffffc0e741f4b9b8 EFLAGS: 00010286 [87.2574] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9d3ec8a6cf60 RCX: 0000000000000000 [87.2582] RDX: 0000000000000002 RSI: ffffffff84ab45a1 RDI: 00000000ffffffff [87.2591] RBP: ffff9d3ec8a6ef20 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffffc0e741f4b840 [87.2599] R10: ffff9d45dc1fffa8 R11: 0000000000000003 R12: ffff9d3ee26d77e0 [87.2608] R13: ffffc0e741f4ba98 R14: ffff9d4458040800 R15: ffff9d44b6b7ca10 [87.2618] FS: 00007f7b9603a840(0000) GS:ffff9d4658982000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [87. ---truncated---

公開: 2026-01-31 最終更新: 2026-06-17 Assigner: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67 ソース: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

総合評価: CVE-2025-71183 は低リスク(24.1/100)。CVSS 深刻度は中。悪用される可能性が高い(EPSS 0.16%、6 パーセンタイル) 推奨対応: 悪用情報と EPSS の推移を監視し、必要に応じて優先度を見直してください。

リスクは変動します。再評価に基づき、本ページの表示内容を更新しています。

CVE-2025-71183 の EPSS(Exploit Prediction Scoring System)スコア

EPSS は日次で悪用されやすさの相対度合いを推定します。パーセンタイルは採点済み CVE の中での相対位置(高いほど相対的に深刻)を示します。

# 日付 旧 EPSS スコア 新 EPSS スコア Δ(新 − 旧)
1 2026-06-15 0.02% 0.16% +0.14%
2 2026-01-31 0.02%

EPSS の全履歴 (全 2 件)

CVE-2025-71183 の CVSS(Common Vulnerability Scoring System)指標

この CVE の CVSS 指標。

ベーススコア バージョン 深刻度 ベクトル 悪用しやすさ 影響 スコアの出典
5.5 3.1 MEDIUM
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H クリックして展開
攻撃ベクター (AV:L)
対象ホスト上でコードを実行できること、または別ユーザーの誤操作・悪意ある操作が前提になる。
攻撃の複雑さ (AC:L)
攻撃者が条件を満たせば、レース条件や珍しい構成に依存せずに再現しやすい。
必要な権限 (PR:L)
一般ユーザー権限があれば足り、管理者(root 相当)は不要。
ユーザーの関与 (UI:N)
メールのリンクを開く、マクロを有効にするなど、被害者の協力がなくても成立しうる。
スコープ (S:U)
影響は脆弱コンポーネントと同一のセキュリティ権限・信頼境界の内側に収まる。
機密性への影響 (C:N)
機微情報の漏えいは想定しにくい。
完全性への影響 (I:N)
改ざん・なりすましによる信頼毀損は軽微か、想定されない。
可用性への影響 (A:H)
長時間のサービス停止、データ損壊による復旧不能に近い状態など、利用者に著しい不便を与えうる。
1.8 3.6 [email protected]

CVE-2025-71183 の弱点分類(列挙)

CVE-2025-71183 の OS トラッカー

vendor priority summary link
debian not yet assigned CVE-2025-71183 not yet assigned priority: Debian including 2 source packages (linux, linux-6.1), 6 status rows across 5 suites (bookworm, bullseye, forky, sid, trixie): resolved 5, open 1. https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2025-71183
redhat low https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-71183
suse medium CVE-2025-71183 severity moderate: SUSE including 367 source package names (2.2.1-5.81:libblkid1-2.40.4-slfo.1.1_4.1, 2.2.1-5.81:libfdisk1-2.40.4-slfo.1.1_4.1, …), 559 product×package rows across 26 product lines (Container suse/sl-micro/6.1/baremetal-os-container, Container suse/sl-micro/6.1/base-os-container, … (26 product lines)): Fixed 260, Known Affected 231, Known Not Affected 43, First Fixed 25. https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-71183/
ubuntu medium CVE-2025-71183 medium priority: Ubuntu including 157 source packages (linux, linux-allwinner-5.19, …), 1256 status rows across 8 suites (bionic, focal, jammy, noble, questing, trusty, upstream, xenial): DNE 871, ignored 173, needed 124, released 83, pending 5. https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2025-71183

CVE-2025-71183 の影響を受けるソフトウェア/構成

ベンダー 製品 バージョン 生の CPE
linux linux_kernel >= 3.18.32, < 3.19 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 4.1.23, < 4.2 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 4.4.8, < 4.5 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 4.5.2, < 4.6 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 4.6.1, < 6.1.161 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.2, < 6.6.121 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.7, < 6.12.66 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.13, < 6.18.6 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 4.6 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:4.6:-:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.19 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.19 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.19 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc3:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.19 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc4:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.19 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc5:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.19 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc6:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.19 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc7:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.19 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc8:*:*:*:*:*:*

CVE-2025-71183 の参考情報

cvelogic Threat Intelligence