CVE-2026-98369
No source can show you its own past. This one can.
Print this page to keep the view as it stands on this date. Everything hidden behind a disclosure opens, and every receipt prints with its value.
xfrm: add missing rcu_read_lock(), skb_dst_force() and dev_hold() for xfrm_trans_reinject()
rank 20 = 0 + 20 + 0 + 0 + 0
rank@v1 · backlog
Someone is already using it
CISA KEV catalog · public proof-of-concept · FIRST EPSS
EPSS 0.00146 · without this subject the record ranks 20
What it costs you if it fires
NVD CVSS base score, then the CNA's own
CVSS 7.8, from the CNA · without this subject the record ranks 0
It is getting worse, not staying still
FIRST EPSS series, rescorings and bad loads removed
no persisting rise in 365 days · without this subject the record ranks 20
How much of the world it touches
NVD CPE configurations
0 products in the CPE ranges · without this subject the record ranks 20
Someone else already set the date
CISA KEV remediation due date
no CISA due date · without this subject the record ranks 20
Hindsight · the state
Foresight · where to check next
No weakness class or product neighbourhood is held for this record, so this index cannot name anywhere to check next. That is an absence in the record, not a finding about the software.
Running Linux? Check your version
A deterministic range check against the ranges this record publishes. It tells you where a version sits in the record, not whether your deployment is exploitable. No account needed.
Watch this record
Matches your own product list against every record this index holds, and tells you when one of them moves.
Set up a watchlist (free with an account: one stack of three products)
Record your call
Keep your verdict, your reason and the evidence together. The record takes its date when you save it.
Or open an investigation: an incident or a near miss on this CVE, kept with its evidence where anyone in your organisation can find it.
Choose your verdict, then sign in or use an email link. Your first 100 records are free. Evidence is frozen when the record is created.
Private to your organization unless you share it. Put the proof link in your ticket so a reviewer can inspect the basis for your call. See how decision records work.
Harm, if it fires from the vector and the weakness
Written for the ticket you're about to file.
CISA KEV & Federal Remediation Deadline from the record and CISA
The fix, and how long it's been waiting.
Show full BOD 26-04 deadline
CISA has not scored it, so the directive's own defaults apply: automatable no, technical impact total. Calendar days from the KEV listing or from when you find it on a system, whichever is first. Federal agencies are bound from 7 Dec 2026, and contracts often carry it to suppliers. The directive and its table
Exploit Status & Known PoCs a ladder, not a score
Current rung: Nothing observed in held sources.
- RUNG 1Nothing observed in held sources
- RUNG 2Proof-of-concept published
- RUNG 3Exploited in the wild · CISA KEV listed
- RUNG 4Ransomware campaign use known
A rung lights from a row in the index, never from an assessment. "Held sources" is the true scope of the claim: this index reads the CVE record, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST's EPSS and public proof-of-concept repositories, and it does not observe attacks.
$7,290 = $4.99M incident cost x 1 exposure x 0.00146 likelihood
udv@v1 · unaudited · wrong for you until you say what you run
$4.99M is the cost of a breach that happened, from IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2026, global average. It is not the value of any asset of yours. That average already covers breaches of every severity, so scaling it by exposure understates a partial-impact record. That is an assumption, not a measurement. Your own asset value goes in the decision record.
What it is stated by the CNA
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xfrm: add missing rcu_read_lock(), skb_dst_force() and dev_hold() for xfrm_trans_reinject() syzbot reported a suspicious RCU usage warning in ip6_pkt_drop(): WARNING: suspicious RCU usage in ip6_pkt_drop include/net/addrconf.h:389 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage! Call Trace: __in6_dev_get_safely include/net/addrconf.h:389 [inline] ip6_pkt_drop+0x596/0x610 net/ipv6/route.c:4620 ip6_pkt_discard+0x1c/0x30 net/ipv6/route.c:4651 xfrm_trans_reinject+0x324/0x630 net/xfrm/xfrm_input.c:806 process_one_work kernel/workqueue.c:3322 [inline] process_scheduled_works+0xa8e/0x14e0 kernel/workqueue.c:340 receipt
Read the rest of the CNA's description
5 worker_thread+0xa47/0xfb0 kernel/workqueue.c:3486 When commit 4f4920669d21 ("xfrm: Reinject transport-mode packets through workqueue") converted xfrm_trans_reinject from a tasklet to a workqueue, the reinjection loop ceased running in softirq context. Workqueue workers run in process context where local_bh_disable() does not enter an RCU read-side critical section under CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU. Because finish callbacks (such as ip6_rcv_finish) expect to run under an RCU read lock (performing route lookups, l3mdev lookups, and accessing RCU-protected data structures), invoking them in workqueue context without rcu_read_lock() triggers RCU lockdep warnings. Furthermore, packets queued to the workqueue via xfrm_trans_queue_net() may carry non-refcounted (noref) dst entries (e.g. from ip_route_input_noref). Additionally, on netdevice unregistration, dst_dev_put() replaces dst->dev with blackhole_netdev, so dst entries do not keep skb->dev alive while queued in the workqueue. Fix these issues by: 1. Calling skb_dst_force(skb) in xfrm_trans_queue_net() while still in the caller's RCU section to ensure dst is reference-counted before queuing. 2. Holding a reference on skb->dev via dev_hold()/dev_put() across workqueue deferral so skb->dev remains valid during finish() callback processing. 3. Acquiring rcu_read_lock() around the finish callback invocation loop in xfrm_trans_reinject().
check it yourself git.kernel.org git.kernel.org git.kernel.org git.kernel.org git.kernel.org git.kernel.org +1 morereceipt
Movement the material steps
Show all 2 observations
2 observations held. A highlighted step crossed a promotion threshold. A step marked with a scoring model moved because the instrument was replaced, not because the vulnerability changed. receipt
The full biography
The record had been public for 1 day when this index was last written.
Siblings and hubs
Records related to this one
None. No alias set, and nothing in the corpus cites this identifier or shares its product family within 60 days.
Browse the index from here
These are index-wide views, not findings about CVE-2026-98369.
What usually comes next
Everything above needs no account. What is below is work: assembling it, scoping it to your estate, watching it, and handing it to someone else.