VulnerabilityPublished 25 Jun 2026Updated 30 Oct 2026

CVE-2026-53224: Linux kernel · Out-of-bounds Read

Source GCVE Database

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-53224· Critical 9.1

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.1 Critical · fixed in dd75066882ecc4ec8df3f5384b4b9fa9579be8f0 : patch Linux kernel as a priority.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 16:33 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.1Critical

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (Linux)	CVSS 3.1	9.1

Patch: Available – fixed in dd75066882ecc4ec8df3f5384b4b9fa9579be8f0, b1ca7dcfb335caa2c73d2d1bb5710e6dea2c11e0, 7560afb8cddafd829e709d7ea09230e45a825557 +3

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
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: None: There is no loss of integrity within 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 25 Jun 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 30 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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.

ghsa-h634-6f45-j5wj

What to do

Upgrade to a fixed release listed under Affected software.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 1da177e4c3f41524e886b7f1b8a0c1fc7321cac2, < dd75066882ecc4ec8df3f5384b4b9fa9579be8f0	Fixed in dd75066882ecc4ec8df3f5384b4b9fa9579be8f0
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 1da177e4c3f41524e886b7f1b8a0c1fc7321cac2, < b1ca7dcfb335caa2c73d2d1bb5710e6dea2c11e0	Fixed in b1ca7dcfb335caa2c73d2d1bb5710e6dea2c11e0
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 1da177e4c3f41524e886b7f1b8a0c1fc7321cac2, < 7560afb8cddafd829e709d7ea09230e45a825557	Fixed in 7560afb8cddafd829e709d7ea09230e45a825557
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 1da177e4c3f41524e886b7f1b8a0c1fc7321cac2, < 512a9bb77c04ac9927648ea58af617e472be96e6	Fixed in 512a9bb77c04ac9927648ea58af617e472be96e6
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 1da177e4c3f41524e886b7f1b8a0c1fc7321cac2, < 29ab56e7660b6f849c10c46e87e085649df751eb	Fixed in 29ab56e7660b6f849c10c46e87e085649df751eb
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 1da177e4c3f41524e886b7f1b8a0c1fc7321cac2, < 6f4c80a2a7e6d06753b89a578b710a2499a5e62b	Fixed in 6f4c80a2a7e6d06753b89a578b710a2499a5e62b

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sctp: validate embedded INIT chunk and address list lengths in cookie sctp_unpack_cookie() only checked that the embedded INIT chunk length did not exceed the remaining cookie payload, but did not ensure that the INIT chunk is large enough to contain a complete INIT header. A malformed COOKIE_ECHO can therefore carry a truncated INIT chunk whose length field is smaller than sizeof(struct sctp_init_chunk). Later, sctp_process_init() accesses INIT parameters unconditionally, which may lead to out-of-bounds reads. In addition, raw_addr_list_len is not fully validated against the remaining cookie payload. When cookie authentication is disabled, an attacker can supply an oversized raw_addr_list_len and cause sctp_raw_to_bind_addrs() to read beyond the end of the cookie. The address parser also lacks sufficient bounds checks for parameter headers and lengths, allowing malformed address parameters to trigger out-of-bounds reads. Fix this by: - requiring the embedded INIT chunk length to be at least sizeof(struct sctp_init_chunk); - validating that the INIT chunk and raw address list together fit within the cookie payload; - verifying sufficient data exists for each address parameter header and payload before parsing it. Note that sctp_verify_init() must be called after sctp_unpack_cookie() and before sctp_process_init() when cookie authentication is disabled. This will be addressed in a separate patch.

CWE-125Out-of-bounds Read (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #8
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design · Language Selection
Use a language that provides appropriate memory abstractions.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Overread Buffers (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-125

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats