CVE Intelligence
Unknown

CVE-2025-68778 — btrfs: don't log conflicting inode if it's a dir moved in the current transaction

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: don't log conflicting inode if it's a dir moved in the current transaction We can't log a conflicting inode if it's a directory and it was moved from one parent directory to another parent directory in the current transaction, as this can result an attempt to have a directory with two hard links during log replay, one for the old parent directory and another for the new parent directory. The following scenario triggers that issue: 1) We have directories "dir1" and "dir2" created in a past transaction. Directory "dir1" has inode A as its parent directory; 2) We move "dir1" to some other directory; 3) We create a file with the name "dir1" in directory inode A; 4) We fsync the new file. This results in logging the inode of the new file and the inode for the directory "dir1" that was previously moved in the current transaction. So the log tree has the INODE_REF item for the new location of "dir1"; 5) We move the new file to some other directory. This results in updating the log tree to included the new INODE_REF for the new location of the file and removes the INODE_REF for the old location. This happens during the rename when we call btrfs_log_new_name(); 6) We fsync the file, and that persists the log tree changes done in the previous step (btrfs_log_new_name() only updates the log tree in memory); 7) We have a power failure; 8) Next time the fs is mounted, log replay happens and when processing the inode for directory "dir1" we find a new INODE_REF and add that link, but we don't remove the old link of the inode since we have not logged the old parent directory of the directory inode "dir1". As a result after log replay finishes when we trigger writeback of the subvolume tree's extent buffers, the tree check will detect that we have a directory a hard link count of 2 and we get a mount failure. The errors and stack traces reported in dmesg/syslog are like this: [ 3845.729764] BTRFS info (device dm-0): start tree-log replay [ 3845.730304] page: refcount:3 mapcount:0 mapping:000000005c8a3027 index:0x1d00 pfn:0x11510c [ 3845.731236] memcg:ffff9264c02f4e00 [ 3845.731751] aops:btree_aops [btrfs] ino:1 [ 3845.732300] flags: 0x17fffc00000400a(uptodate|private|writeback|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x1ffff) [ 3845.733346] raw: 017fffc00000400a 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 ffff9264d978aea8 [ 3845.734265] raw: 0000000000001d00 ffff92650e6d4738 00000003ffffffff ffff9264c02f4e00 [ 3845.735305] page dumped because: eb page dump [ 3845.735981] BTRFS critical (device dm-0): corrupt leaf: root=5 block=30408704 slot=6 ino=257, invalid nlink: has 2 expect no more than 1 for dir [ 3845.737786] BTRFS info (device dm-0): leaf 30408704 gen 10 total ptrs 17 free space 14881 owner 5 [ 3845.737789] BTRFS info (device dm-0): refs 4 lock_owner 0 current 30701 [ 3845.737792] item 0 key (256 INODE_ITEM 0) itemoff 16123 itemsize 160 [ 3845.737794] inode generation 3 transid 9 size 16 nbytes 16384 [ 3845.737795] block group 0 mode 40755 links 1 uid 0 gid 0 [ 3845.737797] rdev 0 sequence 2 flags 0x0 [ 3845.737798] atime 1764259517.0 [ 3845.737800] ctime 1764259517.572889464 [ 3845.737801] mtime 1764259517.572889464 [ 3845.737802] otime 1764259517.0 [ 3845.737803] item 1 key (256 INODE_REF 256) itemoff 16111 itemsize 12 [ 3845.737805] index 0 name_len 2 [ 3845.737807] item 2 key (256 DIR_ITEM 2363071922) itemoff 16077 itemsize 34 [ 3845.737808] location key (257 1 0) type 2 [ 3845.737810] transid 9 data_len 0 name_len 4 [ 3845.737811] item 3 key (256 DIR_ITEM 2676584006) itemoff 16043 itemsize 34 [ 3845.737813] location key (258 1 0) type 2 [ 3845.737814] transid 9 data_len 0 name_len 4 [ 3845.737815] item 4 key (256 DIR_INDEX 2) itemoff 16009 itemsize 34 [ 3845.737816] location key (257 1 0) type 2 [ ---truncated---

Published Jan 13, 2026 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: Linux

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+1

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.2%
ahead of 9% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026
Affects
Linux
Linux
CVSS base
—
Score not published yet.

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Linux Linux).
  2. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  3. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Linux Linux ≥ 44f714dae50a2e795d3268a6831762aa6fa54f55 and < d64f3834dffef80f0a9185a037617a54ed7f4bd2≥ 44f714dae50a2e795d3268a6831762aa6fa54f55 and < 7359e1d39c78816ecbdb0cb4e93975794ce53973≥ 44f714dae50a2e795d3268a6831762aa6fa54f55 and < d478f50727c3ee46d0359f0d2ae114f70191816e≥ 44f714dae50a2e795d3268a6831762aa6fa54f55 and < a35788ddf8df65837897ecbb0ddb2896b863159e≥ 44f714dae50a2e795d3268a6831762aa6fa54f55 and < 266273eaf4d99475f1ae57f687b3e42bc71ec6f0version 4.8 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.20%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Not enough vector or weakness data: use the affected application’s logs as a starting point.
application logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • Affected products added · linux/linux
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Source status changed · → Deferred
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Jan 13, 2026 · Linux

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

5 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Linux
every CVE for this vendor

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-99999 ipv4: validate checksum_start before completing checksum 15h
  • CVE-2026-98432 ipv4: free inet_opt and ireq_opt after an RCU grace period 15h
  • CVE-2026-98424 wifi: cfg80211: undo netns switch if renaming the wiphy fails 1d
  • CVE-2026-98425 wifi: mac80211: don't warn when an IBSS has no channel to scan 1d
  • CVE-2026-98426 wifi: mwifiex: fix IRQ leak using wrong index in MSI-X error path 1d
  • CVE-2026-98427 net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call 1d

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No CVSS score published by NVD, the CNA, CISA or GitHub so far.
  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No CISA SSVC assessment.
  • No CWE classification.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2025-68778 is "btrfs: don't log conflicting inode if it's a dir moved in the current transaction", rated Unknown. It affects Linux (Linux); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. EPSS 0.20% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.