CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-72045NVD status: Received

Linux: Missing Authorization

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2026-72045 is a high-severity missing authorization vulnerability in Linux, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.8 out of 10. It can be exploited with local access to the system by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. The record lists versions 04c014e49b9f53d58a8f94adece8a0af3ae1b85c, 6967dd944be2a71eddab3a2ae1a1a4dd9e5f8eed, e9c5b03208507dd6d58b0c23a2c60b5c2f4c1b11 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 0.15% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Update Linux to 04c014e49b9f53d58a8f94adece8a0af3ae1b85c or 6967dd944be2a71eddab3a2ae1a1a4dd9e5f8eed or e9c5b03208507dd6d58b0c23a2c60b5c2f4c1b11 or 54535692bec9ef464adc714108eb19e49e38b5a2, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
LinuxLinux893ae97214c385be02f8ec097298cc48c7f0d905 up to, but not including, 04c014e49b9f53d58a8f94adece8a0af3ae1b85c; 893ae97214c385be02f8ec097298cc48c7f0d905 up to, but not including, 6967dd944be2a71eddab3a2ae1a1a4dd9e5f8eed; 893ae97214c385be02f8ec097298cc48c7f0d905 up to, but not including, e9c5b03208507dd6d58b0c23a2c60b5c2f4c1b11; 893ae97214c385be02f8ec097298cc48c7f0d905 up to, but not including, 54535692bec9ef464adc714108eb19e49e38b5a2; 893ae97214c385be02f8ec097298cc48c7f0d905 up to, but not including, c73b8795b45f4ad5a95120d2e9b435ea4616e08e; 893ae97214c385be02f8ec097298cc48c7f0d905 up to, but not including, 59da37fee81a8d76079313348ca13c5bc90dd6ae; 893ae97214c385be02f8ec097298cc48c7f0d905 up to, but not including, 8cdcf3d2caacdee7ddd363705fb4d93b0c1a0915; 5.1404c014e49b9f53d58a8f94adece8a0af3ae1b85c, 6967dd944be2a71eddab3a2ae1a1a4dd9e5f8eed, e9c5b03208507dd6d58b0c23a2c60b5c2f4c1b11, 54535692bec9ef464adc714108eb19e49e38b5a2, c73b8795b45f4ad5a95120d2e9b435ea4616e08e, 59da37fee81a8d76079313348ca13c5bc90dd6ae

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
LocalThe attacker needs local access or must trick a user into running something.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
LowA basic user account is enough.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
ChangedThe attack can reach beyond the vulnerable component into other systems.
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:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by CNA.

Official description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: octeontx2-af: cn10k: restrict VF LMTLINE sharing to its own PF rvu_mbox_handler_lmtst_tbl_setup() uses req->base_pcifunc as a direct index into the LMT map table to read another function's LMTLINE physical base address and copy it into the caller's own LMT map table entry. The mailbox dispatcher authenticates req->hdr.pcifunc from the IRQ source, but req->base_pcifunc is a separate payload field and is not sanitized. Reject the request with -EPERM when a VF caller's base_pcifunc is not a valid function under its own PF. is_pf_func_valid() bounds the FUNC field to the PF's configured VF count, keeping the computed index inside the caller's own slot block.

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

The underlying weakness: Missing Authorization

The product does not perform an authorization check when an actor attempts to access a resource or perform an action.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Divide the product into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.
  • Ensure that access control checks are performed related to the business logic. These checks may be different than the access control checks that are applied to more generic resources such as files, connections, processes, memory, and database records. For example, a database may restrict access for medical records to a specific database user, but each record might only be intended to be accessible to the patient and the patient's doctor.
  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, consider using authorization frameworks such as the JAAS Authorization Framework and the OWASP ESAPI Access Control feature.

More Missing Authorization vulnerabilities (CWE-862)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Recent Missing Authorization vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.