CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-72014NVD status: Received

Linux: Integer Overflow or Wraparound

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2026-72014 is a critical-severity integer overflow or wraparound vulnerability in Linux, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 9.8 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. The record lists versions bca33f5442c3094511719d9db792ce3165d87e76, 741a682535deffe9ab7e5c89caf83571efbc9dd9, f14e87d7b166490bceb9603b39310e51595d05b9 as the first without the flaw, so updating Linux to one of those releases or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.72% chance of exploitation within 30 days, higher than 55% of scored CVEs.

Patch this week

Critical severity: a successful attack would have severe impact.

What to do

  1. Update Linux to bca33f5442c3094511719d9db792ce3165d87e76 or 741a682535deffe9ab7e5c89caf83571efbc9dd9 or f14e87d7b166490bceb9603b39310e51595d05b9 or f16866c62656865854106b79bcf6e4ca97a51a92, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
  2. Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
LinuxLinuxb411b3637fa71fce9cf2acf0639009500f5892fe up to, but not including, bca33f5442c3094511719d9db792ce3165d87e76; b411b3637fa71fce9cf2acf0639009500f5892fe up to, but not including, 741a682535deffe9ab7e5c89caf83571efbc9dd9; b411b3637fa71fce9cf2acf0639009500f5892fe up to, but not including, f14e87d7b166490bceb9603b39310e51595d05b9; b411b3637fa71fce9cf2acf0639009500f5892fe up to, but not including, f16866c62656865854106b79bcf6e4ca97a51a92; b411b3637fa71fce9cf2acf0639009500f5892fe up to, but not including, 5f59a8142000f0b8f75c432209ead73c424a745d; b411b3637fa71fce9cf2acf0639009500f5892fe up to, but not including, 38cc4867540ae8beedfe41a1a1a6ed37052c77d6; b411b3637fa71fce9cf2acf0639009500f5892fe up to, but not including, 648d4317326e6aa3f8c05cbf0fd14cc2eba6ca99; b411b3637fa71fce9cf2acf0639009500f5892fe up to, but not including, bd910a7660d280595ef94cb6d193951d855d330f; and 1 more rangesbca33f5442c3094511719d9db792ce3165d87e76, 741a682535deffe9ab7e5c89caf83571efbc9dd9, f14e87d7b166490bceb9603b39310e51595d05b9, f16866c62656865854106b79bcf6e4ca97a51a92, 5f59a8142000f0b8f75c432209ead73c424a745d, 38cc4867540ae8beedfe41a1a1a6ed37052c77d6

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
Integrity
HighData or code can be modified at will.
Availability
HighThe component can be taken down completely.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by CNA.

Official description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drbd: reject data replies with an out-of-range payload size recv_dless_read() receives a P_DATA_REPLY from a peer into the bio of an outstanding read request. The peer-supplied payload length reaches it as the signed int data_size, and two peer-controlled inputs can make it negative. With a negotiated data-integrity-alg the digest length is subtracted first, so a reply whose payload is smaller than the digest underflows data_size. With no integrity algorithm (the default) data_size is assigned from the unsigned h95/h100 wire length and drbdd() never bounds it for a payload-carrying command, so a length above INT_MAX casts it negative; this path needs no non-default feature. The bio receive loop then computes expect = min_t(int, data_size, bv_len), which is negative, and drbd_recv_all_warn(mapped, expect) receives with a size_t of SIZE_MAX into the first mapped page. The sibling receive path read_in_block() is not affected: it uses an unsigned size and rejects it against DRBD_MAX_BIO_SIZE before receiving. Reject a data reply whose size is negative after the optional digest subtraction, covering both triggers. Impact: a malicious or man-in-the-middle DRBD peer copies attacker-chosen bytes past a bio page in the receiver, corrupting kernel memory. A node that reads from its peer (a diskless node, or read-balancing to the peer) is exposed in the default configuration; data-integrity-alg is not required.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Integer Overflow or Wraparound

The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Ensure that all protocols are strictly defined, such that all out-of-bounds behavior can be identified simply, and require strict conformance to the protocol.
  • Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. If possible, choose a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. Use libraries or frameworks that make it easier to handle numbers without unexpected consequences. Examples include safe integer handling packages such as SafeInt (C++) or IntegerLib (C or C++).

More Integer Overflow or Wraparound vulnerabilities (CWE-190)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: total).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Recent Integer Overflow or Wraparound vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.