CVE-2026-72288VulnerabilityPublished 29 Oct 2026Updated 30 Oct 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: kernel security, bug fix, and enhancement update

Affects Red Hat kernel security,Source GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Authoritative record:CVE-2026-72288· Critical 9.3

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.3 Critical · fixed in Red Hat package updates : patch Red Hat kernel security, as a priority.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 22:57 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.3Critical

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	9.3

Patch: Available – fixed in eb74f3feb68e64cf69f86cb806a15d8cfb6757f4, d19dca8194ebed371e624331c6be2cb73b562caf, b1a89d12d35a8256d2b170ced0b1c86851f3def2 +3

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
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: 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: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
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 15 Aug 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.

What to do

Upgrade to a fixed release listed under Affected software.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 5dd4b924e390af426e424d5e52c1b4d1566af817, < eb74f3feb68e64cf69f86cb806a15d8cfb6757f4	Fixed in eb74f3feb68e64cf69f86cb806a15d8cfb6757f4
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 5dd4b924e390af426e424d5e52c1b4d1566af817, < d19dca8194ebed371e624331c6be2cb73b562caf	Fixed in d19dca8194ebed371e624331c6be2cb73b562caf
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 5dd4b924e390af426e424d5e52c1b4d1566af817, < b1a89d12d35a8256d2b170ced0b1c86851f3def2	Fixed in b1a89d12d35a8256d2b170ced0b1c86851f3def2
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 5dd4b924e390af426e424d5e52c1b4d1566af817, < 7258770e5814f15e8308ebda82ac9acf6964ba8e	Fixed in 7258770e5814f15e8308ebda82ac9acf6964ba8e
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 5dd4b924e390af426e424d5e52c1b4d1566af817, < 7328cff91703ac4e93c200b20cebaa36d2f314ed	Fixed in 7328cff91703ac4e93c200b20cebaa36d2f314ed
LinuxLinux	Affected ≥ 5dd4b924e390af426e424d5e52c1b4d1566af817, < 77c61235d66246dd6a5f55587f0afc273d832775	Fixed in 77c61235d66246dd6a5f55587f0afc273d832775

AI-suggested

A security update for the Linux kernel packages is available from Red Hat for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8. Users should apply the update as soon as possible and reboot their systems to activate the fixes. Red Hat treats all kernel errata as security-relevant and strongly advises against delaying updates to avoid exposure to known vulnerabilities.

Description

This Red Hat security advisory addresses multiple vulnerabilities in the Linux kernel packages for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8. The update includes fixes for four security issues: two related to the KVM arm64 virtual generic interrupt controller (VGIC) handling race conditions and interrupt migration (CVE-2026-72288, CVE-2026-72289), one involving reserving a terminator byte for the iSCSI login payload (CVE-2026-90011), and one fixing an integer overflow in the encrypted keys subsystem (CVE-2026-98222). The advisory also includes robustness improvements for GRE header handling. The update is rated as important by Red Hat and requires a system reboot to take effect.

Impact

The vulnerabilities fixed by this update affect the Linux kernel's core components, including virtualization (KVM arm64 VGIC), storage (iSCSI target), and encrypted key management. Exploitation could lead to race conditions causing incorrect interrupt handling, potential memory corruption from integer overflow, and protocol handling issues in iSCSI. These issues may compromise system stability or security, especially in virtualized or encrypted environments. Red Hat rates the overall security impact as Important.

CWE-364Signal Handler Race Condition (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product uses a signal handler that introduces a race condition.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design
Design signal handlers to only set flags, rather than perform complex functionality. These flags can then be checked and acted upon within the main program loop.
Implementation
Only use reentrant functions within signal handlers. Also, use validation to ensure that state is consistent while performing asynchronous actions that affect the state of execution.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.11.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-1341Multiple Releases of Same Resource or Handle (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product attempts to close or release a resource or handle more than once, without any successful open between the close operations.
Implementation
Change the code's logic so that the resource is only closed once. This might require simplifying or refactoring. This fix can be simple to do in small code blocks, but more difficult when multiple closes are buried within complex conditionals.
Implementation · Refactoring
It can be effective to implement a flag that is (1) set when the resource is opened, (2) cleared when it is closed, and (3) checked before closing. This approach can be useful when there are disparate cases in which closes must be performed.
Implementation · Refactoring
When closing a resource, set the resource's associated variable to NULL or equivalent value for the given language. Some APIs will ignore this null value without causing errors.
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
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).
CWE-787Out-of-bounds Write (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #5
The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
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)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 30 Oct 2026, 22:57 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-364, CWE-1341, CWE-125 +1

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats