BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-23394High confidence

af_unix: Give up GC if MSG_PEEK intervened.

Linux · Linux

4.7MediumCVSS 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 20 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 19 Aug 2026

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • Exploitation requires an existing local or physical foothold with privileges.
  • EPSS is 0.09% 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 20 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.

24 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 20 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.6.12.94-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.1.187-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.19.10-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.19.10-1Debian 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-azure-fdeAffected, 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-azure-nvidia-6.14Affected, 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-2026-15396

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: af_unix: Give up GC if MSG_PEEK intervened. Igor Ushakov reported that GC purged the receive queue of an alive socket due to a race with MSG_PEEK with a nice repro. This is the exact same issue previously fixed by commit cbcf01128d0a ("af_unix: fix garbage collect vs MSG_PEEK"). After GC was replaced with the current algorithm, the cited commit removed the locking dance in unix_peek_fds() and reintroduced the same issue. The problem is that MSG_PEEK bumps a file refcount without interacting with GC. Consider an SCC containing sk-A and sk-B, where sk-A is close()d but can be recv()ed via sk-B. The bad thing happens if sk-A is recv()ed with MSG_PEEK from sk-B and sk-B is close()d while GC is checking unix_vertex_dead() for sk-A and sk-B. GC thread User thread --------- ----------- unix_vertex_dead(sk-A) -> true <------. \ `------ recv(sk-B, MSG_PEEK) invalidate !! -> sk-A's file refcount : 1 -> 2 close(sk-B) -> sk-B's file refcount : 2 -> 1 unix_vertex_dead(sk-B) -> true Initially, sk-A's file refcount is 1 by the inflight fd in sk-B recvq. GC thinks sk-A is dead because the file refcount is the same as the number of its inflight fds. However, sk-A's file refcount is bumped silently by MSG_PEEK, which invalidates the previous evaluation. At this moment, sk-B's file refcount is 2; one by the open fd, and one by the inflight fd in sk-A. The subsequent close() releases one refcount by the former. Finally, GC incorrectly concludes that both sk-A and sk-B are dead. One option is to restore the locking dance in unix_peek_fds(), but we can resolve this more elegantly thanks to the new algorithm. The point is that the issue does not occur without the subsequent close() and we actually do not need to synchronise MSG_PEEK with the dead SCC detection. When the issue occurs, close() and GC touch the same file refcount. If GC sees the refcount being decremented by close(), it can just give up garbage-collecting the SCC. Therefore, we only need to signal the race during MSG_PEEK with a proper memory barrier to make it visible to the GC. Let's use seqcount_t to notify GC when MSG_PEEK occurs and let it defer the SCC to the next run. This way no locking is needed on the MSG_PEEK side, and we can avoid imposing a penalty on every MSG_PEEK unnecessarily. Note that we can retry within unix_scc_dead() if MSG_PEEK is detected, but we do not do so to avoid hung task splat from abusive MSG_PEEK calls.

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
0.0
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 20 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: af_unix: Give up GC if MSG_PEEK intervened. Igor Ushakov reported that GC purged the receive queue of an alive socket due to a race with MSG_PEEK with a nice repro. This is the exact same issue previously fixed by commit cbcf01128d0a ("af_unix: fix garbage collect vs MSG_PEEK"). After GC was replaced with the current algorithm, the cited commit removed the locking dance in unix_peek_fds() and reintroduced the same issue. The problem is that MSG_PEEK bumps a file refcount without interacting with GC. Consider an SCC containing sk-A and sk-B, where sk-A is close()d but can be recv()ed via sk-B. The bad thing happens if sk-A is recv()ed with MSG_PEEK from sk-B and sk-B is close()d while GC is checking unix_vertex_dead() for sk-A and sk-B. GC thread User thread --------- ----------- unix_vertex_dead(sk-A) -> true <------. \ `------ recv(sk-B, MSG_PEEK) invalidate !! -> sk-A's file refcount : 1 -> 2 close(sk-B) -> sk-B's file refcount : 2 -> 1 unix_vertex_dead(sk-B) -> true Initially, sk-A's file refcount is 1 by the inflight fd in sk-B recvq. GC thinks sk-A is dead because the file refcount is the same as the number of its inflight fds. However, sk-A's file refcount is bumped silently by MSG_PEEK, which invalidates the previous evaluation. At this moment, sk-B's file refcount is 2; one by the open fd, and one by the inflight fd in sk-A. The subsequent close() releases one refcount by the former. Finally, GC incorrectly concludes that both sk-A and sk-B are dead. One option is to restore the locking dance in unix_peek_fds(), but we can resolve this more elegantly thanks to the new algorithm. The point is that the issue does not occur without the subsequent close() and we actually do not need to synchronise MSG_PEEK with the dead SCC detection. When the issue occurs, close() and GC touch the same file refcount. If GC sees the refcount being decremented by close(), it can just give up garbage-collecting the SCC. Therefore, we only need to signal the race during MSG_PEEK with a proper memory barrier to make it visible to the GC. Let's use seqcount_t to notify GC when MSG_PEEK occurs and let it defer the SCC to the next run. This way no locking is needed on the MSG_PEEK side, and we can avoid imposing a penalty on every MSG_PEEK unnecessarily. Note that we can retry within unix_scc_dead() if MSG_PEEK is detected, but we do not do so to avoid hung task splat from abusive MSG_PEEK calls.

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: af_unix: Give up GC if MSG_PEEK intervened. Igor Ushakov reported that GC purged the receive queue of an alive socket due to a race with MSG_PEEK with a nice repro. This is the exact same issue previously fixed by commit cbcf01128d0a ("af_unix: fix garbage collect vs MSG_PEEK"). After GC was replaced with the current algorithm, the cited commit removed the locking dance in unix_peek_fds() and reintroduced the same issue. The problem is that MSG_PEEK bumps a file refcount without interacting with GC. Consider an SCC containing sk-A and sk-B, where sk-A is close()d but can be recv()ed via sk-B. The bad thing happens if sk-A is recv()ed with MSG_PEEK from sk-B and sk-B is close()d while GC is checking unix_vertex_dead() for sk-A and sk-B. GC thread User thread --------- ----------- unix_vertex_dead(sk-A) -> true <------. \ `------ recv(sk-B, MSG_PEEK) invalidate !! -> sk-A's file refcount : 1 -> 2 close(sk-B) -> sk-B's file refcount : 2 -> 1 unix_vertex_dead(sk-B) -> true Initially, sk-A's file refcount is 1 by the inflight fd in sk-B recvq. GC thinks sk-A is dead because the file refcount is the same as the number of its inflight fds. However, sk-A's file refcount is bumped silently by MSG_PEEK, which invalidates the previous evaluation. At this moment, sk-B's file refcount is 2; one by the open fd, and one by the inflight fd in sk-A. The subsequent close() releases one refcount by the former. Finally, GC incorrectly concludes that both sk-A and sk-B are dead. One option is to restore the locking dance in unix_peek_fds(), but we can resolve this more elegantly thanks to the new algorithm. The point is that the issue does not occur without the subsequent close() and we actually do not need to synchronise MSG_PEEK with the dead SCC detection. When the issue occurs, close() and GC touch the same file refcount. If GC sees the refcount being decremented by close(), it can just give up garbage-collecting the SCC. Therefore, we only need to signal the race during MSG_PEEK with a proper memory barrier to make it visible to the GC. Let's use seqcount_t to notify GC when MSG_PEEK occurs and let it defer the SCC to the next run. This way no locking is needed on the MSG_PEEK side, and we can avoid imposing a penalty on every MSG_PEEK unnecessarily. Note that we can retry within unix_scc_dead() if MSG_PEEK is detected, but we do not do so to avoid hung task splat from abusive MSG_PEEK calls.

Why

The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.

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: af_unix: Give up GC if MSG_PEEK intervened. Igor Ushakov reported that GC purged the receive queue of an alive socket due to a race with MSG_PEEK with a nice repro. This is the exact same issue previously fixed by commit cbcf01128d0a ("af_unix: fix garbage collect vs MSG_PEEK"). After GC was replaced with the current algorithm, the cited commit removed the locking dance in unix_peek_fds() and reintroduced the same issue. The problem is that MSG_PEEK bumps a file refcount without interacting with GC. Consider an SCC containing sk-A and sk-B, where sk-A is close()d but can be recv()ed via sk-B. The bad thing happens if sk-A is recv()ed with MSG_PEEK from sk-B and sk-B is close()d while GC is checking unix_vertex_dead() for sk-A and sk-B. GC thread User thread --------- ----------- unix_vertex_dead(sk-A) -> true <------. \ `------ recv(sk-B, MSG_PEEK) invalidate !! -> sk-A's file refcount : 1 -> 2 close(sk-B) -> sk-B's file refcount : 2 -> 1 unix_vertex_dead(sk-B) -> true Initially, sk-A's file refcount is 1 by the inflight fd in sk-B recvq. GC thinks sk-A is dead because the file refcount is the same as the number of its inflight fds. However, sk-A's file refcount is bumped silently by MSG_PEEK, which invalidates the previous evaluation. At this moment, sk-B's file refcount is 2; one by the open fd, and one by the inflight fd in sk-A. The subsequent close() releases one refcount by the former. Finally, GC incorrectly concludes that both sk-A and sk-B are dead. One option is to restore the locking dance in unix_peek_fds(), but we can resolve this more elegantly thanks to the new algorithm. The point is that the issue does not occur without the subsequent close() and we actually do not need to synchronise MSG_PEEK with the dead SCC detection. When the issue occurs, close() and GC touch the same file refcount. If GC sees the refcount being decremented by close(), it can just give up garbage-collecting the SCC. Therefore, we only need to signal the race during MSG_PEEK with a proper memory barrier to make it visible to the GC. Let's use seqcount_t to notify GC when MSG_PEEK occurs and let it defer the SCC to the next run. This way no locking is needed on the MSG_PEEK side, and we can avoid imposing a penalty on every MSG_PEEK unnecessarily. Note that we can retry within unix_scc_dead() if MSG_PEEK is detected, but we do not do so to avoid hung task splat from abusive MSG_PEEK calls.

Why

The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.

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 → Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition') → 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
High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
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-362 ↗

CWE-362: Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition'). The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.

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:H/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.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.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-362
A

Official authority intelligence

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

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-15396Official EUVD mapping

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: af_unix: Give up GC if MSG_PEEK intervened. Igor Ushakov reported that GC purged the receive queue of an alive socket due to a race with MSG_PEEK with a nice repro. This is the exact same issue previously fixed by commit cbcf01128d0a ("af_unix: fix garbage collect vs MSG_PEEK"). After GC was replaced with the current algorithm, the cited commit removed the locking dance in unix_peek_fds() and reintroduced the same issue. The problem is that MSG_PEEK bumps a file refcount without interacting with GC. Consider an SCC containing sk-A and sk-B, where sk-A is close()d but can be recv()ed via sk-B. The bad thing happens if sk-A is recv()ed with MSG_PEEK from sk-B and sk-B is close()d while GC is checking unix_vertex_dead() for sk-A and sk-B. GC thread User thread --------- ----------- unix_vertex_dead(sk-A) -> true <------. \ `------ recv(sk-B, MSG_PEEK) invalidate !! -> sk-A's file refcount : 1 -> 2 close(sk-B) -> sk-B's file refcount : 2 -> 1 unix_vertex_dead(sk-B) -> true Initially, sk-A's file refcount is 1 by the inflight fd in sk-B recvq. GC thinks sk-A is dead because the file refcount is the same as the number of its inflight fds. However, sk-A's file refcount is bumped silently by MSG_PEEK, which invalidates the previous evaluation. At this moment, sk-B's file refcount is 2; one by the open fd, and one by the inflight fd in sk-A. The subsequent close() releases one refcount by the former. Finally, GC incorrectly concludes that both sk-A and sk-B are dead. One option is to restore the locking dance in unix_peek_fds(), but we can resolve this more elegantly thanks to the new algorithm. The point is that the issue does not occur without the subsequent close() and we actually do not need to synchronise MSG_PEEK with the dead SCC detection. When the issue occurs, close() and GC touch the same file refcount. If GC sees the refcount being decremented by close(), it can just give up garbage-collecting the SCC. Therefore, we only need to signal the race during MSG_PEEK with a proper memory barrier to make it visible to the GC. Let's use seqcount_t to notify GC when MSG_PEEK occurs and let it defer the SCC to the next run. This way no locking is needed on the MSG_PEEK side, and we can avoid imposing a penalty on every MSG_PEEK unnecessarily. Note that we can retry within unix_scc_dead() if MSG_PEEK is detected, but we do not do so to avoid hung task splat from abusive MSG_PEEK calls.

Official EUVD record ↗
BSI · German · WID-SEC-2026-0861Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service zu verursachen, Sicherheitsmaßnahmen zu umgehen, Informationen offenzulegen, weitere nicht spezifizierte Auswirkungen zu verursachen und potentiell Code auszuführen.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20260401Security Bulletin 01 Apr 2026

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 01 Apr 2026, published on 1 April 2026. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1163Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de Debian LTS

d?id=CVE-2025-39925 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40054 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40054 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40064 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40064 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40102 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40102 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40139 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40139 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40168 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40168 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40206 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40206 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40307 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40307 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68794 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68794 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31419 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31419 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43491 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43491 Référence CVE CVE-2026-45963 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-45963 Référence CVE CVE-2026-46111 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-46111 Référence CVE CVE-2026-46158 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-46158 Référence CVE CVE-2026-46170 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-46170 Référence CVE CVE-2026-46266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-46266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-53089 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0956Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

/suse-su-20263393-1 Référence CVE CVE-2023-20585 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2023-20585 Référence CVE CVE-2025-10263 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-10263 Référence CVE CVE-2025-39894 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-39894 Référence CVE CVE-2025-40341 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-40341 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71089 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71089 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23240 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23240 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23248 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23248 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23393 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23393 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23451 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23451 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31414 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31414 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31429 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31429 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31438 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31438 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31450 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31450 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31452 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31452 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31466 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31466 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31469 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0927Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2025-71286 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71291 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71291 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71297 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71297 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71302 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71302 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71305 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71305 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71314 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71314 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23248 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23248 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23276 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23276 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23393 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23393 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23451 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23451 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31414 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31414 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31429 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31429 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31430 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31430 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31438 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31438 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31439 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31439 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31440 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31440 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31441 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0861Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-23262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23267 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23267 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23272 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23272 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23278 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23278 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23351 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23392 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23392 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23427 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23427 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23428 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23428 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23450 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23450 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23455 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23455 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31402 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31402 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31411 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31411 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31418 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31418 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31419 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

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

d?id=CVE-2026-23262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23264 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23264 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23267 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23267 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23272 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23272 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23278 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23278 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23351 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23392 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23392 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23427 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23427 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23428 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23428 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23450 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23450 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23455 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23455 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31402 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31402 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31411 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31411 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31418 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31418 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31419 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0809Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de Debian

an msg00266 du 21 juin 2026 https://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/2026/msg00266.html Référence CVE CVE-2025-22069 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-22069 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68251 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68251 Référence CVE CVE-2025-68768 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-68768 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71289 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71289 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23247 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23247 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23272 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23272 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23346 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23346 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23469 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23469 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31420 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31420 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31486 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31486 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31560 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31560 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31613 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31613 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31663 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31663 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31717 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31717 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43116 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0787Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-23257 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23258 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23258 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23260 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23260 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23261 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23261 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23262 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23264 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23264 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23351 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31419 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31419 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31431 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31431 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31504 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31504 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31533 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31533 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31676 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31676 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43033 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43033 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43077 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43077 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43078 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-2026-23256 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23257 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23257 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23258 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23258 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23260 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23260 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23261 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23261 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23262 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23264 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23264 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23351 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31419 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31419 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31431 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31431 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31504 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31504 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31533 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31533 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31676 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31676 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43033 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43033 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43077 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43077 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43078 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0695Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2025-71139 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71141 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71141 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71142 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71142 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71144 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71144 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71152 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71152 Référence CVE CVE-2025-71155 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2025-71155 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23112 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23112 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23351 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31419 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31419 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31431 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31431 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31504 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31504 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31533 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31533 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31676 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31676 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43033 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43033 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43077 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43077 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43078 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-2026-23256 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23257 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23257 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23258 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23258 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23260 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23260 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23261 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23261 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23262 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23264 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23264 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23351 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23454 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23454 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31419 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31419 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31431 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31431 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31504 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31504 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31533 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31533 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43033 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43033 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43077 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43077 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43078 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-2026-23257 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23258 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23258 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23260 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23260 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23261 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23261 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23262 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23264 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23264 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23351 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23351 Référence CVE CVE-2026-23394 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-23394 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31419 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31419 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31431 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31431 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31504 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31504 Référence CVE CVE-2026-31533 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-31533 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43033 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43033 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43077 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43077 Référence CVE CVE-2026-43078 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-43078 Gestion détaillée du document le 22 mai 2026 Version initiale

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2026-012704LinuxのLinux Kernelにおける競合状態に関する脆弱性

Linuxカーネルにおいて、以下の脆弱性が修正されました。af_unixにおいて、MSG_PEEKが介入した場合にガベージコレクション(GC)をあきらめる問題です。Igor Ushakov氏は、MSG_PEEKとの競合により生存しているソケットの受信キューがGCによって消去される問題を報告しました。この問題は、以前のコミットcbcf01128d0a("af_unix: fix garbage collect vs MSG_PEEK")で修正されたのとまったく同じ問題でした。GCが現在のアルゴリズムに置き換えられた後、このコミットはunix_peek_fds()内のロック調整を除去し、同じ問題を再導入しました。問題の原因は、MSG_PEEKがGCと連動せずにファイル参照カウントを増加させてしまうことです。sk-Aとsk-Bを含む強連結成分(SCC)を考えます。sk-Aはclose()されているがsk-B経由でrecv()が可能です。悪影響は、sk-BからMSG_PEEK付きでsk-Aがrecv()され、GCがsk-Aとsk-Bのunix_vertex_dead()をチェックしている間にsk-Bがclose()された場合に発生します。GCスレッドはunix_vertex_dead(sk-A)をtrueと判断しますが、recv(sk-B, MSG_PEEK)によりsk-Aのファイル参照カウントが1から2に増えます。次にclose(sk-B)が呼ばれ、sk-Bのファイル参照カウントが2から1になります。最初はsk-Aのファイル参照カウントはsk-Bのrecvキューにあるファイルディスクリプタによって1でした。GCはファイル参照カウントがインフライトのファイルディスクリプタ数と同じためsk-Aは死んでいると考えます。しかしMSG_PEEKによりsk-Aのファイル参照カウントが密かに増加し、GCの評価が無効になります。この時点でsk-Bのファイル参照カウントはオープンファイルディスクリプタによる1とsk-A内のインフライトファイルディスクリプタによる1の計2です。その後のclose()で1つの参照が解放されます。結果としてGCはsk-Aとsk-Bの両方が死んでいると誤判断します。一つの対策はunix_peek_fds()でロック調整を復元することですが、新しいアルゴリズムを活用し、よりエレガントに解決可能です。問題は次にclose()が発生しなければ起きず、MSG_PEEKと死んだSCC検出を同期させる必要は実際にはありません。問題発生時にclose()とGCが同じファイル参照カウントに触れます。GCがclose()による参照カウントの減少を検知すれば、SCCのガベージコレクトをあきらめるだけで済みます。したがってMSG_PEEK中の競合を正しいメモリバリアでGCに可視化するだけで十分です。seqcount_tを使いMSG_PEEK発生をGCに通知し、次の実行でSCCの処理を延期させます。これによりMSG_PEEK側にロックは不要となり、不要なペナルティを避けられます。なおunix_scc_dead()内でMSG_PEEK検出時にリトライ可能ですが、濫用によるタスクハングを避けるため、実行しません。

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: 61a75360dca93c945ef6bd757f8b8a96f39b77cb < 980999a96e1ad043f1197606e5d637219cb102b9, 7b1ffbd3b22e755d481d49647dcb7c5cfbde5844 < 3106f326f67c03dd9da4ca64663d11e40138cf40, 118f457da9ed58a79e24b73c2ef0aa1987241f0e < e3dd56fb5683ba80bf8d7a2f9aa21cfa53f05202, 118f457da9ed58a79e24b73c2ef0aa1987241f0e < 72cf49ad50c16270b52bc512d9c2df5743922968, 118f457da9ed58a79e24b73c2ef0aa1987241f0e < 37dd7ab332396eb8dd80b2dc7ea4b61abf767436, 118f457da9ed58a79e24b73c2ef0aa1987241f0e < e5b31d988a41549037b8d8721a3c3cae893d8670, 6.1.141 < 6.1.183, 6.6.93 < 6.6.142, 6.10
Fixed
Linux: < 6.10, 6.1.183 ≤ 6.1.*, 6.6.142 ≤ 6.6.*, 6.12.92 ≤ 6.12.*, 6.18.23 ≤ 6.18.*, 6.19.10 ≤ 6.19.*, 7.0 ≤ *
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 25 Mar 2026 · Last source change 19 Aug 2026, 16:27 UTC · CWE-362 · Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')

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-2026-15396
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceNIST NVD
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment

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

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.
    Before
    7b1ffbd3b22e755d481d49647dcb7c5cfbde5844 < 3106f326f67c03dd9da4ca64663d11e40138cf40; 118f457da9ed58a79e24b73c2ef0aa1987241f0e < e3dd56fb5683ba80bf8d7a2f9aa21cfa53f05202; 118f457da9ed58a79e24b73c2ef0aa1987241f0e < 72cf49ad50c16270b52bc512d9c2df5743922968; 118f457da9ed58a79e24b73c2ef0aa1987241f0e < 37dd7ab332396eb8dd80b2dc7ea4b61abf767436; 118f457da9ed58a79e24b73c2ef0aa1987241f0e < e5b31d988a41549037b8d8721a3c3cae893d8670; 61a75360dca93c945ef6bd757f8b8a96f39b77cb; 6.6.93 < 6.6.142; 6.1.141 < 6.2 · Fixed: < 6.10; 6.6.142 ≤ 6.6.*; 6.12.92 ≤ 6.12.*; 6.18.23 ≤ 6.18.*; 6.19.10 ≤ 6.19.*; 7.0 ≤ *
    After
    61a75360dca93c945ef6bd757f8b8a96f39b77cb < 980999a96e1ad043f1197606e5d637219cb102b9; 7b1ffbd3b22e755d481d49647dcb7c5cfbde5844 < 3106f326f67c03dd9da4ca64663d11e40138cf40; 118f457da9ed58a79e24b73c2ef0aa1987241f0e < e3dd56fb5683ba80bf8d7a2f9aa21cfa53f05202; 118f457da9ed58a79e24b73c2ef0aa1987241f0e < 72cf49ad50c16270b52bc512d9c2df5743922968; 118f457da9ed58a79e24b73c2ef0aa1987241f0e < 37dd7ab332396eb8dd80b2dc7ea4b61abf767436; 118f457da9ed58a79e24b73c2ef0aa1987241f0e < e5b31d988a41549037b8d8721a3c3cae893d8670; 6.1.141 < 6.1.183; 6.6.93 < 6.6.142 · Fixed: < 6.10; 6.1.183 ≤ 6.1.*; 6.6.142 ≤ 6.6.*; 6.12.92 ≤ 6.12.*; 6.18.23 ≤ 6.18.*; 6.19.10 ≤ 6.19.*; 7.0 ≤ *
    CNA ↗
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-2026-23394 · cve.blacktree.nl