CVE-2026-72221
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sunrpc: wait for in-flight TLS handshake callback when cancel loses race When wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout() in svc_tcp_handshake() returns 0 (timeout) or -ERESTARTSYS (signal) and tls_handshake_cancel() then returns false, handshake_complete() has won the cancellation race: it has set HANDSHAKE_F_REQ_COMPLETED and is about to invoke svc_tcp_handshake_done(), but the callback's side effects on xpt_flags and on svsk->sk_handshake_done have not yet committed. The current code reads xpt_flags immediately to decide whether the session succeeded. Two races result. If the callback has executed set_bit(XPT_TLS_SESSION) but not yet clear_bit(XPT_HANDSHAKE), svc_tcp_handshake() sees a session, enqueues the transport, and returns. svc_xprt_received() then clears XPT_BUSY, a worker thread picks the transport up, the dispatcher in svc_handle_xprt() observes XPT_HANDSHAKE still set, and xpo_handshake is invoked a second time. That svc_tcp_handshake() calls init_completion(&svsk->sk_handshake_done) while the original callback concurrently calls complete_all() on it, corrupting the embedded swait_queue. If the callback has set HANDSHAKE_F_REQ_COMPLETED but not yet entered svc_tcp_handshake_done(), svc_tcp_handshake() reads XPT_TLS_SESSION as clear and tears the connection down even though the handshake is about to succeed. Wait for the callback to commit before inspecting xpt_flags. The completion is guaranteed to fire because handshake_complete() invokes svc_tcp_handshake_done() unconditionally once it has set HANDSHAKE_F_REQ_COMPLETED.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataThere is no version to upgrade to and no patch to apply. Every affected install stays exposed until the vendor ships a fix — or somebody else builds one.
Free. We build fixes in the order the community asks for them — and we’ll tell you the moment this one lands.
We develop and verify an original fix where the vendor hasn’t, from $5,750. Deployed to your staging first — never straight to production.
Scope it with usSee what else the community needs solved on the solutions-needed board.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-72221 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-72221 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data