<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2026 13:05:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2024-26792 — btrfs: fix double free of anonymous device after snapshot creation failure</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2024-26792</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;btrfs: fix double free of anonymous device after snapshot creation failure&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When creating a snapshot we may do a double free of an anonymous device
in case there&amp;#39;s an error committing the transaction. The second free may
result in freeing an anonymous device number that was allocated by some
other subsystem in the kernel or another btrfs filesystem.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The steps that lead to this:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;1) At ioctl.c:create_snapshot() we allocate an anonymous device number
   and assign it to pending_snapshot-&amp;gt;anon_dev;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;2) Then we call btrfs_commit_transaction() and end up at
   transaction.c:create_pending_snapshot();&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;3) There we call btrfs_get_new_fs_root() and pass it the anonymous device
   number stored in pending_snapshot-&amp;gt;anon_dev;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;4) btrfs_get_new_fs_root() frees that anonymous device number because
   btrfs_lookup_fs_root() returned a root - someone else did a lookup
   of the new root already, which could some task doing backref walking;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;5) After that some error happens in the transaction commit path, and at
   ioctl.c:create_snapshot() we jump to the &amp;#39;fail&amp;#39; label, and after
   that we free again the same anonymous device number, which in the
   meanwhile may have been reallocated somewhere else, because
   pending_snapshot-&amp;gt;anon_dev still has the same value as in step 1.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Recently syzbot ran into this and reported the following trace:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;------------[ cut here ]------------
  ida_free called for id=51 which is not a…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;btrfs: fix double free of anonymous device after snapshot creation failure&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When creating a snapshot we may do a double free of an anonymous device
in case there&amp;#39;s an error committing the transaction. The second free may
result in freeing an anonymous device number that was allocated by some
other subsystem in the kernel or another btrfs filesystem.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The steps that lead to this:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;1) At ioctl.c:create_snapshot() we allocate an anonymous device number
   and assign it to pending_snapshot-&amp;gt;anon_dev;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;2) Then we call btrfs_commit_transaction() and end up at
   transaction.c:create_pending_snapshot();&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;3) There we call btrfs_get_new_fs_root() and pass it the anonymous device
   number stored in pending_snapshot-&amp;gt;anon_dev;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;4) btrfs_get_new_fs_root() frees that anonymous device number because
   btrfs_lookup_fs_root() returned a root - someone else did a lookup
   of the new root already, which could some task doing backref walking;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;5) After that some error happens in the transaction commit path, and at
   ioctl.c:create_snapshot() we jump to the &amp;#39;fail&amp;#39; label, and after
   that we free again the same anonymous device number, which in the
   meanwhile may have been reallocated somewhere else, because
   pending_snapshot-&amp;gt;anon_dev still has the same value as in step 1.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Recently syzbot ran into this and reported the following trace:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;------------[ cut here ]------------
  ida_free called for id=51 which is not a…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2024-26792</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
