VulnerabilityPublished 9 Jun 2026Updated 19 Oct 2026

CVE-2026-46319: Linux kernel · Race Condition

Affects Linux kernelSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.8 High · fixed in f23424a0ddadb494d4bd57056a7ca703312d3a7b : patch Linux kernel soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 13:47 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.8High

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS

0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 1% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

Exploitation: No evidence of active exploitation and no public proof of concept
Automatable: Attackers cannot reliably automate steps 1–4 of the kill chain
Technical impact: Total control over the software or total information disclosure

CISA SSVC assessment, 2026-10-16.

Patch

Available – fixed in f23424a0ddadb494d4bd57056a7ca703312d3a7b, f462dca0c8415bf0058d0ffa476354c4476d0f09, ece578ca61e572df96cfc80456357ebfae0b4b9e +5

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: High

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 9 Jun 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade to a fixed release listed under Affected software.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 138470a9b2cc2e26e6018300394afc3858a54e6a, < f23424a0ddadb494d4bd57056a7ca703312d3a7b	Fixed in f23424a0ddadb494d4bd57056a7ca703312d3a7b
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 138470a9b2cc2e26e6018300394afc3858a54e6a, < f462dca0c8415bf0058d0ffa476354c4476d0f09	Fixed in f462dca0c8415bf0058d0ffa476354c4476d0f09
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 138470a9b2cc2e26e6018300394afc3858a54e6a, < ece578ca61e572df96cfc80456357ebfae0b4b9e	Fixed in ece578ca61e572df96cfc80456357ebfae0b4b9e
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 138470a9b2cc2e26e6018300394afc3858a54e6a, < a2e0c045c87aa252eb61412e67dd91f2c2b19f81	Fixed in a2e0c045c87aa252eb61412e67dd91f2c2b19f81
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 138470a9b2cc2e26e6018300394afc3858a54e6a, < 67c9ecc9f2575273ed1323e312881fc98ac83d6d	Fixed in 67c9ecc9f2575273ed1323e312881fc98ac83d6d
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 138470a9b2cc2e26e6018300394afc3858a54e6a, < 17dfb67cb399b660105d9a8c6100851c0d0cdc70	Fixed in 17dfb67cb399b660105d9a8c6100851c0d0cdc70

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: act_ct: Only release RCU read lock after ct_ft When looking up a flow table in act_ct in tcf_ct_flow_table_get(), rhashtable_lookup_fast() internally opens and closes an RCU read critical section before returning ct_ft. The tcf_ct_flow_table_cleanup_work() can complete before refcount_inc_not_zero() is invoked on the returned ct_ft resulting in a UAF on the already freed ct_ft object. This vulnerability can lead to privilege escalation. Analysis from zdi-disclosures@trendmicro.com: When initializing act_ct, tcf_ct_init() is called, which internally triggers tcf_ct_flow_table_get(). static int tcf_ct_flow_table_get(struct net *net, struct tcf_ct_params *params) { struct zones_ht_key key = { .net = net, .zone = params->zone }; struct tcf_ct_flow_table *ct_ft; int err = -ENOMEM; mutex_lock(&zones_mutex); ct_ft = rhashtable_lookup_fast(&zones_ht, &key, zones_params); // [1] if (ct_ft && refcount_inc_not_zero(&ct_ft->ref)) // [2] goto out_unlock; ... } static __always_inline void *rhashtable_lookup_fast( struct rhashtable *ht, const void *key, const struct rhashtable_params params) { void *obj; rcu_read_lock(); obj = rhashtable_lookup(ht, key, params); rcu_read_unlock(); return obj; } At [1], rhashtable_lookup_fast() looks up and returns the corresponding ct_ft from zones_ht . The lookup is performed within an RCU read critical section through rcu_read_lock() / rcu_read_unlock(), which prevents the object from being freed. However, at the point of function return, rcu_read_unlock() has already been called, and there is nothing preventing ct_ft from being freed before reaching refcount_inc_not_zero(&ct_ft->ref) at [2]. This interval becomes the race window, during which ct_ft can be freed. Free Process: tcf_ct_flow_table_put() is executed through the path tcf_ct_cleanup() call_rcu() tcf_ct_params_free_rcu() tcf_ct_params_free() tcf_ct_flow_table_put(). static void tcf_ct_flow_table_put(struct tcf_ct_flow_table *ct_ft) { if (refcount_dec_and_test(&ct_ft->ref)) { rhashtable_remove_fast(&zones_ht, &ct_ft->node, zones_params); INIT_RCU_WORK(&ct_ft->rwork, tcf_ct_flow_table_cleanup_work); // [3] queue_rcu_work(act_ct_wq, &ct_ft->rwork); } } At [3], tcf_ct_flow_table_cleanup_work() is scheduled as RCU work static void tcf_ct_flow_table_cleanup_work(struct work_struct *work) { struct tcf_ct_flow_table *ct_ft; struct flow_block *block; ct_ft = container_of(to_rcu_work(work), struct tcf_ct_flow_table, rwork); nf_flow_table_free(&ct_ft->nf_ft); block = &ct_ft->nf_ft.flow_block; down_write(&ct_ft->nf_ft.flow_block_lock); WARN_ON(!list_empty(&block->cb_list)); up_write(&ct_ft->nf_ft.flow_block_lock); kfree(ct_ft); // [4] module_put(THIS_MODULE); } tcf_ct_flow_table_cleanup_work() frees ct_ft at [4]. When this function executes between [1] and [2], UAF occurs. This race condition has a very short race window, making it generally difficult to trigger. Therefore, to trigger the vulnerability an msleep(100) was inserted after[1]

CWE-362Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition') (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
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.
Architecture and Design
In languages that support it, use synchronization primitives. Only wrap these around critical code to minimize the impact on performance.
Architecture and Design
Use thread-safe capabilities such as the data access abstraction in Spring.
Architecture and Design
Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.11.2 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Leveraging Time-of-Check and Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) Race Conditions (opens in a new tab)
Leveraging Race Conditions (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

WeaknessesCWE-362

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats