BlackTreeCVE Intelligence
← Back to the CVE catalogue
Full vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-64269High confidence

RDMA/rtrs-srv: Bound RDMA-Write length to chunk size in rdma_write_sg

Linux · Linux

9.1CriticalCVSS 3.1
Recommended action
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix

Critical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded. 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 severityCriticalOperational priority:Critical, unchanged from published severity.unchanged

Evidence used

  • No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
  • The selected CVSS metric records a network-reachable, unauthenticated path with no user interaction.
  • EPSS is 0.71% for the current model date.

Compensating controls

  • Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
  • Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
  • 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: Within 3 daysRemediation target: Within 90 days

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.

25 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.6.12.96-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.1.180-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian bookwormbookworm · sourcelinux-6.12Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.6.12.100-1~deb12u1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian forkyforky · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.7.1.4-1Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026
Debian sidsid · sourcelinuxVendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release.7.1.4-1Debian 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-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-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
Direct vendor intelligence

Authoritative vendor CSAF and VEX advisories

Structured product status and remediation from the issuing vendor. Product-state explanations are always visible; large lists can be searched or downloaded.

1 current
CVE-2026-64269 · CSAF 2.0 · revision 11 · interimSUSE Product Security TeamCVE-2026-64269
247 known affected

The vendor explicitly identifies these products as affected by this CVE.

  • kernel-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP7
  • kernel-default-extra as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP7
  • kernel-source as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15 SP7
  • cluster-md-kmp-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • dlm-kmp-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • gfs2-kmp-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • kernel-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • kernel-source as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • ocfs2-kmp-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 15 SP7
  • kernel-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 16.0
  • kernel-source as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Availability Extension 16.0
  • kernel-default as component of SUSE Linux Enterprise High Performance Computing 15 SP1
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: RDMA/rtrs-srv: Bound RDMA-Write length to chunk size in rdma_write_sg When the server answers an RTRS READ, rdma_write_sg() builds the source scatter/gather entry for the IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE that returns data to the peer. Its length is taken directly from the wire descriptor: plist->length = le32_to_cpu(id->rd_msg->desc[0].len); rd_msg points into the chunk buffer that the remote peer filled via RDMA-WRITE-WITH-IMM (rtrs_srv_rdma_done() -> process_io_req() -> process_read()), so desc[0].len is attacker-controlled and, before this change, was only rejected when zero. The source address is the fixed chunk start (dma_addr[msg_id]) and the source lkey is the PD-wide local_dma_lkey, which is not tied to the chunk's MR mapping, so the verbs layer does not constrain the transfer length to max_chunk_size. msg_id and off are bounded against queue_depth and max_chunk_size in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(), but desc[0].len is a separate field that was not checked against the chunk size. A peer that advertises desc[0].len larger than max_chunk_size can make the posted RDMA write read past the chunk's mapped region. The resulting behaviour depends on the IOMMU configuration: with no IOMMU or in passthrough mode the read may extend into memory adjacent to the chunk and be returned to the peer, which can disclose host memory; with a translating IOMMU the out-of-range access is expected to fault and abort the connection. In either case the transfer exceeds what the protocol permits and is driven by a remote peer. Reject a descriptor length above max_chunk_size, mirroring the existing off >= max_chunk_size bound in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(). Legitimate clients do not exceed it: the client sets desc[0].len to its MR length, which is capped at the negotiated max_io_size (max_chunk_size - MAX_HDR_SIZE).
Remediation
To install this SUSE Security Update use the SUSE recommended installation methods like YaST online_update or "zypper patch".
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-2026-48981

No EUVD known-exploited evidence

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: RDMA/rtrs-srv: Bound RDMA-Write length to chunk size in rdma_write_sg When the server answers an RTRS READ, rdma_write_sg() builds the source scatter/gather entry for the IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE that returns data to the peer. Its length is taken directly from the wire descriptor: plist->length = le32_to_cpu(id->rd_msg->desc[0].len); rd_msg points into the chunk buffer that the remote peer filled via RDMA-WRITE-WITH-IMM (rtrs_srv_rdma_done() -> process_io_req() -> process_read()), so desc[0].len is attacker-controlled and, before this change, was only rejected when zero. The source address is the fixed chunk start (dma_addr[msg_id]) and the source lkey is the PD-wide local_dma_lkey, which is not tied to the chunk's MR mapping, so the verbs layer does not constrain the transfer length to max_chunk_size. msg_id and off are bounded against queue_depth and max_chunk_size in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(), but desc[0].len is a separate field that was not checked against the chunk size. A peer that advertises desc[0].len larger than max_chunk_size can make the posted RDMA write read past the chunk's mapped region. The resulting behaviour depends on the IOMMU configuration: with no IOMMU or in passthrough mode the read may extend into memory adjacent to the chunk and be returned to the peer, which can disclose host memory; with a translating IOMMU the out-of-range access is expected to fault and abort the connection. In either case the transfer exceeds what the protocol permits and is driven by a remote peer. Reject a descriptor length above max_chunk_size, mirroring the existing off >= max_chunk_size bound in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(). Legitimate clients do not exceed it: the client sets desc[0].len to its MR length, which is capped at the negotiated max_io_size (max_chunk_size - MAX_HDR_SIZE).

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
9.1 · CVSS 3.1
Advisory evidence
No linked advisory details stored yet
Recommended actionPatch only the product branches with a verified fix

Critical technical impact with a remotely reachable, unauthenticated path; no CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded. 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: RDMA/rtrs-srv: Bound RDMA-Write length to chunk size in rdma_write_sg When the server answers an RTRS READ, rdma_write_sg() builds the source scatter/gather entry for the IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE that returns data to the peer. Its length is taken directly from the wire descriptor: plist->length = le32_to_cpu(id->rd_msg->desc[0].len); rd_msg points into the chunk buffer that the remote peer filled via RDMA-WRITE-WITH-IMM (rtrs_srv_rdma_done() -> process_io_req() -> process_read()), so desc[0].len is attacker-controlled and, before this change, was only rejected when zero. The source address is the fixed chunk start (dma_addr[msg_id]) and the source lkey is the PD-wide local_dma_lkey, which is not tied to the chunk's MR mapping, so the verbs layer does not constrain the transfer length to max_chunk_size. msg_id and off are bounded against queue_depth and max_chunk_size in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(), but desc[0].len is a separate field that was not checked against the chunk size. A peer that advertises desc[0].len larger than max_chunk_size can make the posted RDMA write read past the chunk's mapped region. The resulting behaviour depends on the IOMMU configuration: with no IOMMU or in passthrough mode the read may extend into memory adjacent to the chunk and be returned to the peer, which can disclose host memory; with a translating IOMMU the out-of-range access is expected to fault and abort the connection. In either case the transfer exceeds what the protocol permits and is driven by a remote peer. Reject a descriptor length above max_chunk_size, mirroring the existing off >= max_chunk_size bound in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(). Legitimate clients do not exceed it: the client sets desc[0].len to its MR length, which is capped at the negotiated max_io_size (max_chunk_size - MAX_HDR_SIZE).

What

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: RDMA/rtrs-srv: Bound RDMA-Write length to chunk size in rdma_write_sg When the server answers an RTRS READ, rdma_write_sg() builds the source scatter/gather entry for the IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE that returns data to the peer. Its length is taken directly from the wire descriptor: plist->length = le32_to_cpu(id->rd_msg->desc[0].len); rd_msg points into the chunk buffer that the remote peer filled via RDMA-WRITE-WITH-IMM (rtrs_srv_rdma_done() -> process_io_req() -> process_read()), so desc[0].len is attacker-controlled and, before this change, was only rejected when zero. The source address is the fixed chunk start (dma_addr[msg_id]) and the source lkey is the PD-wide local_dma_lkey, which is not tied to the chunk's MR mapping, so the verbs layer does not constrain the transfer length to max_chunk_size. msg_id and off are bounded against queue_depth and max_chunk_size in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(), but desc[0].len is a separate field that was not checked against the chunk size. A peer that advertises desc[0].len larger than max_chunk_size can make the posted RDMA write read past the chunk's mapped region. The resulting behaviour depends on the IOMMU configuration: with no IOMMU or in passthrough mode the read may extend into memory adjacent to the chunk and be returned to the peer, which can disclose host memory; with a translating IOMMU the out-of-range access is expected to fault and abort the connection. In either case the transfer exceeds what the protocol permits and is driven by a remote peer. Reject a descriptor length above max_chunk_size, mirroring the existing off >= max_chunk_size bound in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(). Legitimate clients do not exceed it: the client sets desc[0].len to its MR length, which is capped at the negotiated max_io_size (max_chunk_size - MAX_HDR_SIZE).

Why

The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. 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: RDMA/rtrs-srv: Bound RDMA-Write length to chunk size in rdma_write_sg When the server answers an RTRS READ, rdma_write_sg() builds the source scatter/gather entry for the IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE that returns data to the peer. Its length is taken directly from the wire descriptor: plist->length = le32_to_cpu(id->rd_msg->desc[0].len); rd_msg points into the chunk buffer that the remote peer filled via RDMA-WRITE-WITH-IMM (rtrs_srv_rdma_done() -> process_io_req() -> process_read()), so desc[0].len is attacker-controlled and, before this change, was only rejected when zero. The source address is the fixed chunk start (dma_addr[msg_id]) and the source lkey is the PD-wide local_dma_lkey, which is not tied to the chunk's MR mapping, so the verbs layer does not constrain the transfer length to max_chunk_size. msg_id and off are bounded against queue_depth and max_chunk_size in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(), but desc[0].len is a separate field that was not checked against the chunk size. A peer that advertises desc[0].len larger than max_chunk_size can make the posted RDMA write read past the chunk's mapped region. The resulting behaviour depends on the IOMMU configuration: with no IOMMU or in passthrough mode the read may extend into memory adjacent to the chunk and be returned to the peer, which can disclose host memory; with a translating IOMMU the out-of-range access is expected to fault and abort the connection. In either case the transfer exceeds what the protocol permits and is driven by a remote peer. Reject a descriptor length above max_chunk_size, mirroring the existing off >= max_chunk_size bound in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(). Legitimate clients do not exceed it: the client sets desc[0].len to its MR length, which is capped at the negotiated max_io_size (max_chunk_size - MAX_HDR_SIZE).

Why

The current structured CVE record identifies a security weakness, but the root cause requires confirmation in the linked vendor material.

How

An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation without authentication or user interaction. 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
a network path → vulnerable operation → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
Attack surface
Network
Privileges required
None: unauthenticated exploitation is possible
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.
CWE not yet assigned
CVSS vector
?CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:H

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

AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRNonePrivileges required: The attacker does not need an account or existing privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.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
No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
NetworkUnauthenticated
A

Official authority intelligence

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

ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-48981Official EUVD mapping

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: RDMA/rtrs-srv: Bound RDMA-Write length to chunk size in rdma_write_sg When the server answers an RTRS READ, rdma_write_sg() builds the source scatter/gather entry for the IB_WR_RDMA_WRITE that returns data to the peer. Its length is taken directly from the wire descriptor: plist->length = le32_to_cpu(id->rd_msg->desc[0].len); rd_msg points into the chunk buffer that the remote peer filled via RDMA-WRITE-WITH-IMM (rtrs_srv_rdma_done() -> process_io_req() -> process_read()), so desc[0].len is attacker-controlled and, before this change, was only rejected when zero. The source address is the fixed chunk start (dma_addr[msg_id]) and the source lkey is the PD-wide local_dma_lkey, which is not tied to the chunk's MR mapping, so the verbs layer does not constrain the transfer length to max_chunk_size. msg_id and off are bounded against queue_depth and max_chunk_size in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(), but desc[0].len is a separate field that was not checked against the chunk size. A peer that advertises desc[0].len larger than max_chunk_size can make the posted RDMA write read past the chunk's mapped region. The resulting behaviour depends on the IOMMU configuration: with no IOMMU or in passthrough mode the read may extend into memory adjacent to the chunk and be returned to the peer, which can disclose host memory; with a translating IOMMU the out-of-range access is expected to fault and abort the connection. In either case the transfer exceeds what the protocol permits and is driven by a remote peer. Reject a descriptor length above max_chunk_size, mirroring the existing off >= max_chunk_size bound in rtrs_srv_rdma_done(). Legitimate clients do not exceed it: the client sets desc[0].len to its MR length, which is capped at the negotiated max_io_size (max_chunk_size - MAX_HDR_SIZE).

Official EUVD record ↗
BSI · German · WID-SEC-2026-2527Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen, dazu können DoS-Angriffe, die Offenlegung von Informationen, die Beschädigung des Speichers oder die Umgehung von Sicherheitsmaßnahmen gehören.

Official advisory ↗
Cyber Security Agency of Singapore · English · CSA-SB-20260729Security Bulletin 29 Jul 2026

The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore included this CVE in its official Security Bulletin 29 Jul 2026, published on 29 July 2026. Open the linked bulletin for the product, severity and reference information published in that issue.

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1252Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-64260 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64261 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64261 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64262 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64263 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64263 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64264 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64264 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64265 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64265 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64267 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64267 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64268 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64268 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64269 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64269 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64270 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64270 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64271 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64271 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64272 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64272 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64275 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64275 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64276 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64276 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64277 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1255Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2026-64245 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64246 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64246 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64247 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64247 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64249 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64249 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64253 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64253 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64256 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64256 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64265 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64265 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64268 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64268 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64269 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64269 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64270 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64270 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64271 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64271 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64272 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64272 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64275 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64275 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64276 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64276 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64277 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1229Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-64260 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64261 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64261 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64262 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64263 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64263 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64264 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64264 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64265 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64265 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64267 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64267 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64268 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64268 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64269 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64269 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64270 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64270 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64271 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64271 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64272 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64272 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64275 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64275 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64276 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64276 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64277 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1202Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2026-64243 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64244 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64244 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64245 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64245 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64246 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64246 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64247 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64247 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64249 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64249 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64257 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64257 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64268 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64268 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64269 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64269 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64271 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64271 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64275 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64275 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64276 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64276 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64277 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64277 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64286 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64286 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64287 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1203Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-64260 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64261 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64261 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64262 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64263 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64263 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64264 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64264 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64265 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64265 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64267 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64267 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64268 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64268 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64269 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64269 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64270 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64270 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64271 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64271 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64272 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64272 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64275 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64275 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64276 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64276 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64277 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1162Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux d'Ubuntu

d?id=CVE-2026-64260 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64261 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64261 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64262 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64262 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64263 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64263 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64264 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64264 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64265 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64265 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64267 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64267 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64268 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64268 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64269 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64269 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64270 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64270 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64271 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64271 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64272 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64272 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64275 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64275 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64276 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64276 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64277 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1164Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de SUSE

d?id=CVE-2026-64243 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64244 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64244 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64245 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64245 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64246 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64246 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64247 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64247 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64249 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64249 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64257 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64257 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64268 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64268 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64269 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64269 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64271 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64271 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64275 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64275 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64276 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64276 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64277 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64277 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64286 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64286 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64287 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-1031Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de Debian LTS

d?id=CVE-2026-64206 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64227 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64227 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64241 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64241 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64248 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64248 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64250 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64250 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64256 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64256 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64265 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64265 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64268 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64268 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64269 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64269 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64270 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64270 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64271 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64271 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64272 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64272 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64275 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64275 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64276 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64276 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64277 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
CERT-FR · French · CERTFR-2026-AVI-0982Multiples vulnérabilités dans le noyau Linux de Debian LTS

d?id=CVE-2026-64189 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64191 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64191 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64206 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64206 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64248 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64248 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64249 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64249 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64250 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64250 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64252 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64252 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64266 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64266 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64268 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64268 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64269 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64269 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64271 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64271 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64273 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64273 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64274 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64274 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64275 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64275 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64276 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64276 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64277 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64277 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64279 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-64279 Référence CVE CVE-2026-64296 https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=

Official advisory ↗
JVN iPedia · Japanese · JVNDB-2026-028238LinuxのLinux Kernelにおける不特定の脆弱性

Linuxカーネルにおいて、以下の脆弱性が修正されました。RDMA/rtrs-srv: rdma_write_sg内でのRDMA-Writeの長さをチャンクサイズに制限しました。サーバーがRTRS READに応答する際、rdma_write_sg()はIB_WR_RDMA_WRITEの送信元スキャッター/ギャザーエントリを構築します。この長さはワイヤーディスクリプタから直接取得されます。plist-＞length = le32_to_cpu(id-＞rd_msg-＞desc[0].len)です。rd_msgはリモートピアがRDMA-WRITE-WITH-IMMを介して書き込んだチャンクバッファを指しており（rtrs_srv_rdma_done() -＞ process_io_req() -＞ process_read()）、desc[0].lenは攻撃者が制御可能な値でした。この値は本変更以前はゼロの場合にのみ拒否されていました。送信元アドレスは固定のチャンク開始位置（dma_addr[msg_id]）であり、送信元のlkeyはチャンクのMRマッピングに結びついていないPD全体のlocal_dma_lkeyです。そのため、verbsレイヤーは転送長をmax_chunk_sizeに制限しません。msg_id及びoffはrtrs_srv_rdma_done()内でqueue_depthおよびmax_chunk_sizeにより制限されていますが、desc[0].lenは別のフィールドであり、チャンクサイズと照合されていませんでした。desc[0].lenがmax_chunk_sizeを超えていると広告するピアは、投稿されたRDMA書き込みがチャンクのマップ領域を超えて読み取らせることが可能になります。結果としての挙動はIOMMU設定に依存します。IOMMUが無効またはパススルーモードの場合、読み取りはチャンク隣接のメモリにまで及び、ピアに返されてホストメモリが露出する可能性があります。翻訳型IOMMUの場合、範囲外アクセスはフォールトを発生させ、コネクションを中断させることが期待されます。いずれの場合も、転送はプロトコルで許容される範囲を超えており、リモートピアによって引き起こされます。rtrs_srv_rdma_done()内の既存のoff ＞= max_chunk_sizeの境界チェックに倣い、ディスクリプタ長がmax_chunk_sizeを超える場合は拒否します。正当なクライアントはこれを超えません。クライアントはdesc[0].lenを自身のMR長にセットしますが、これは交渉済みのmax_io_size（max_chunk_size - MAX_HDR_SIZE）で上限設定されています。

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
Fixed
Linux: < 5.8, 5.10.266 ≤ 5.10.*, 5.15.212 ≤ 5.15.*, 6.1.178 ≤ 6.1.*, 6.6.145 ≤ 6.6.*, 6.12.96 ≤ 6.12.*, 6.18.39 ≤ 6.18.*, 7.1.4 ≤ 7.1.*, 7.2 ≤ *
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. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04

Evidence and provenance

Published 25 Jul 2026 · Last source change 23 Aug 2026, 12:45 UTC · CWE not yet assigned

CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
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-2026-48981
Product sourceVendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team
Remediation sourceVendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team
CWE sourceUnavailable
NVD statusNVD modified after enrichment

Missing structured fields: CWE classification. Missing data is not evidence of low risk; review the primary advisory.

Material change intelligence

What changed after publication

View recent updates ↗
  1. Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.
    Before
    9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 68c09762172f6224e9ddf9b0a60bacbb36e443eb; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 6cada540150894e81042a0ae0c796a21a9a877da; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 2912f3d40355dabc08fdbaaf2764d02445fe88dc; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 6f40246f4312fdbab5a13cc440adebf95eb2aa66; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 5a45d0aa1fa50a333ce5763ade744e2d89838667; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < da3e44add94b05dfde56f898421922f5cf35705f; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 963af8d97a8c6a117134a8d0db1415e0489200b1; 5.8 · Fixed: < 5.8; 5.15.212 ≤ 5.15.*; 6.1.178 ≤ 6.1.*; 6.6.145 ≤ 6.6.*; 6.12.96 ≤ 6.12.*; 6.18.39 ≤ 6.18.*; 7.1.4 ≤ 7.1.*; 7.2 ≤ *
    After
    9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < a35b7a8728a53ddc80b323970689fa5985816836; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 68c09762172f6224e9ddf9b0a60bacbb36e443eb; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 6cada540150894e81042a0ae0c796a21a9a877da; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 2912f3d40355dabc08fdbaaf2764d02445fe88dc; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 6f40246f4312fdbab5a13cc440adebf95eb2aa66; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 5a45d0aa1fa50a333ce5763ade744e2d89838667; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < da3e44add94b05dfde56f898421922f5cf35705f; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 963af8d97a8c6a117134a8d0db1415e0489200b1 · Fixed: < 5.8; 5.10.266 ≤ 5.10.*; 5.15.212 ≤ 5.15.*; 6.1.178 ≤ 6.1.*; 6.6.145 ≤ 6.6.*; 6.12.96 ≤ 6.12.*; 6.18.39 ≤ 6.18.*; 7.1.4 ≤ 7.1.*
    CNA ↗
  2. Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.
    Before
    9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 68c09762172f6224e9ddf9b0a60bacbb36e443eb; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 6cada540150894e81042a0ae0c796a21a9a877da; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 2912f3d40355dabc08fdbaaf2764d02445fe88dc; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 6f40246f4312fdbab5a13cc440adebf95eb2aa66; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 5a45d0aa1fa50a333ce5763ade744e2d89838667; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < da3e44add94b05dfde56f898421922f5cf35705f; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 963af8d97a8c6a117134a8d0db1415e0489200b1; 5.8 · Fixed: < 5.8; 5.15.212 ≤ 5.15.*; 6.1.178 ≤ 6.1.*; 6.6.145 ≤ 6.6.*; 6.12.96 ≤ 6.12.*; 6.18.39 ≤ 6.18.*; 7.1.4 ≤ 7.1.*; 7.2-rc1 ≤ *
    After
    9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 68c09762172f6224e9ddf9b0a60bacbb36e443eb; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 6cada540150894e81042a0ae0c796a21a9a877da; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 2912f3d40355dabc08fdbaaf2764d02445fe88dc; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 6f40246f4312fdbab5a13cc440adebf95eb2aa66; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 5a45d0aa1fa50a333ce5763ade744e2d89838667; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < da3e44add94b05dfde56f898421922f5cf35705f; 9cb837480424e78ed585376f944088246685aec3 < 963af8d97a8c6a117134a8d0db1415e0489200b1; 5.8 · Fixed: < 5.8; 5.15.212 ≤ 5.15.*; 6.1.178 ≤ 6.1.*; 6.6.145 ≤ 6.6.*; 6.12.96 ≤ 6.12.*; 6.18.39 ≤ 6.18.*; 7.1.4 ≤ 7.1.*; 7.2 ≤ *
    CNA ↗
Material fields only · duplicate refreshes suppressed · history retained for the configured operational retention period
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
ENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-48981↗Vendor CSAF · SUSE Product Security Team↗Patch or update reference↗Patch or update reference↗Patch or update reference↗Patch or update reference↗CVE authority or vendor reference↗Official CVE record (CNA and ADP data)↗NVD record↗
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-2026-64269 · cve.blacktree.nl