BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-23200High confidence

ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF

Linux · Linux

5.5MediumCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 18 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
R
Operational reassessment

Published severity in operational context

Open reassessment dashboard →
Published severityMediumOperational priority:Low, lowered one band.downgradedsince 23 May 2026

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
  • EPSS is 0.12% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
  • Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.

Verification

  1. Confirm that the asset runs Linux Linux and falls inside the recorded affected range.
  2. Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
  3. Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
  4. Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Mitigation target: No default targetRemediation target: Normal maintenance

This automated reassessment organises public evidence. It does not know asset exposure, business impact or control effectiveness and does not replace CVSS or a human risk decision.

Cross-source reconciliation

Remediation availability differs by product scope

Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 18 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Distribution package intelligence

Release-specific package status

Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.

22 package states
Package result overrides the generic status

BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 18 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.

Repository candidate not checked

A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.

Distribution releaseSource packageVendor stateFixed versionEvidence
Debian trixietrixie · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.12.73-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcelinuxNot affectedDebian marks this release not affected (fixed-version marker 0).Not published in this feedDebian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.18.10-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.18.10-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinuxAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-awsAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-azureAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-gcpAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-gkeAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-gkeopAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-ibmAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-lowlatencyAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-nvidiaAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-nvidia-lowlatencyAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-nvidia-tegraAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-oem-6.11Affected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-oracleAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-raspiAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-raspi-realtimeAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-realtimeAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-riscvAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archivelinux-xilinxAffected, no fix publishedCanonical OVAL identifies this running kernel flavour as affected and does not publish a fixed package version in this definition.Not published in this feedCanonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Optional official sources

National CERT insights
?CERT means Computer Emergency Response Team; CSIRT is the closely related term Computer Security Incident Response Team.

Choose official national sources for this report. Each advisory shows its original language. Your selection is remembered on this device and included in shared links.

Official European source

ENISA European Vulnerability Database

Official EUVD identifiers, advisory evidence and known-exploited context. Missing fields are not treated as evidence of low risk.

1 current
ENISA EUVD identifier

EUVD-2026-5845

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

ENISA has published the identifier mapping but no EUVD description has been stored yet.

EUVD state
Present in the current official mapping
Known exploitation
Not present in the current ENISA EUVD known-exploited dataset. This is not proof of no exploitation.
ENISA score
Not supplied in the stored EUVD record
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix

Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 18 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.

Fix availability varies by product
01

What, why and how

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling->fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: <TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling->fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: <TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f

Why

The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling->fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: <TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f

Why

The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.

How

An attacker operating through local access may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.

02

Exploit reality and attack path

CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.

Observed exploitation
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
No confirmed evidence

No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.

Public PoC / exploit material
?Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.
None recorded

No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.

Likely attack path
local access → NULL Pointer Dereference → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Local
Privileges required
Low: a basic authenticated account is required
User interaction
None
Attack complexity
Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
Security boundary
Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
Weakness
?CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness.
CWE-476 ↗

CWE-476: NULL Pointer Dereference. The product dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid but is NULL.

CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Common Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.

AVLocalAttack vector: The attacker needs local access to the vulnerable system.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CNoneConfidentiality impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.INoneIntegrity impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.
Post-exploitation / living off the land
The issue can support a local privilege or sandbox boundary transition; normal system utilities may then be available in the gained context.
CWE-476
A

Official authority intelligence

Only matched European and national findings are included. Language selectors and unavailable sources are omitted.

BSI · German · WID-SEC-2026-0421Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux-Kernel ausnutzen, um nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen, die möglicherweise zu einer Denial-of-Service- Bedingung führen oder eine Speicherbeschädigung verursachen können.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20260218Security Bulletin 18 Feb 2026

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 18 Feb 2026, published on 18 February 2026. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0831Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-23178 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23179 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23179 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23180 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23180 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23182 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23182 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23187 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23187 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23190 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23190 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23191 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23191 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23193 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23193 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23198 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23198 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23200 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23200 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23202 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23202 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23204 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23204 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23205 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23205 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23206 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23206 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23212 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23212 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23213 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23213 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23214 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23214 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23215 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0746Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-23178 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23179 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23179 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23180 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23180 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23182 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23182 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23187 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23187 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23190 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23190 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23191 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23191 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23193 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23193 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23198 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23198 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23200 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23200 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23202 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23202 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23204 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23204 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23205 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23205 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23206 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23206 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23209 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23209 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23212 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23212 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23213 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23213 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23214 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0663Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-23178 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23179 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23179 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23180 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23180 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23182 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23182 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23187 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23187 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23190 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23190 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23191 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23191 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23193 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23193 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23198 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23198 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23200 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23200 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23202 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23202 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23204 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23204 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23205 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23205 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23206 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23206 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23209 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23209 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23212 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23212 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23213 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23213 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23214 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0638Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-23178 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23179 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23179 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23180 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23180 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23182 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23182 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23187 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23187 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23190 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23190 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23191 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23191 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23193 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23193 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23198 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23198 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23200 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23200 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23202 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23202 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23204 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23204 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23205 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23205 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23206 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23206 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23209 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23209 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23212 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23212 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23213 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23213 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23214 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0192Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de Debian

d?id=CVE-2026-23182 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23187 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23187 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23188 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23188 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23189 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23189 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23190 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23190 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23191 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23191 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23193 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23193 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23198 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23198 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23199 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23199 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23200 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23200 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23201 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23201 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23202 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23202 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23204 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23204 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23205 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23205 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23206 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23206 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23209 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23209 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23213 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23213 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23214 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2026-008328LinuxのLinux KernelにおけるNULL ポインタデリファレンスに関する脆弱性

LinuxカーネルにはIPv6ルーティングに関する脆弱性が存在しました。この脆弱性は、既存のIPv6ルートに対してRTF_ADDRCONFフラグを誤ってクリアする際に、ECMP(Equal-Cost Multi-Path)対応の兄弟ルート数に不整合が生じる問題です。この不整合によりfib6_add_rt2node関数がカーネルをクラッシュさせる可能性があります。具体的には、ゲートウェイを持つ既存ルートからRTF_ADDRCONFフラグがクリアされると、そのルートがECMPの対象になりますが、対応するfib6_siblingsリストに正しく追加されず、兄弟数のカウントが食い違います。結果として、後続のECMPルート追加時にカーネルがクラッシュします。この問題は既存ルートにゲートウェイが無い場合のみRTF_ADDRCONFフラグをクリアするように修正されており、これにより不整合とクラッシュのリスクが解消されました。

Official advisory ↗
03

Patch and workaround

Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.

Status
?Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change.
Fix availability varies by product
Affected
Linux: cb2b0caa8ca93cbe39177516669bf699c74f7041 < 50b7c7a255858a85c4636a1e990ca04591153dca, 03f642caab84bbfd138e74f671bb436186ea7e82 < d8143c54ceeba232dc8a13aa0afa14a44b371d93, 3e5b25da0b4109a3e063759735e6ec4236ea5a05 < b8ad2d53f706aeea833d23d45c0758398fede580, f72514b3c5698e4b900b25345e09f9ed33123de6 < bbf4a17ad9ffc4e3d7ec13d73ecd59dea149ed25, 61d88ea0f30c88e4ea98793594943aed8f1fc9ab, 6.17.13 < 6.18, 6.6.120 < 6.6.124, 6.12.63 < 6.12.70, 6.18.2 < 6.18.10
Fixed
An authoritative update reference is available, but the fixed version is not recorded in the structured CVE fields. Check the linked vendor advisory for the applicable release.
Action
Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
Workaround
No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 14 Feb 2026 · Last source change 23 May 2026, 16:04 UTC · CWE-476 · NULL Pointer Dereference

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceNIST NVD
EPSS source
?The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.
FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-5845
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceNIST NVD
NVD statusNVD enriched

Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗

No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.

Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
CVE
Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
CVSS
Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
EPSS
Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
CWE
Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
CNA
CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
CISA ADP
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
NVD
National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
CERT / CSIRT
A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
PoC
Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
CSAF
Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
LoTL
Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.
Free version - for non-commercial use only.CVE-2026-23200 · cve.blacktree.nl