CVE-2026-64177

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: phonet/pep: disable BH around forwarded sk_receive_skb() The networking receive path is usually run from softirq context, but protocols that take the socket lock may have packets stored in the backlog and processed later from process context. In that case release_sock() -> __release_sock() drops the slock with spin_unlock_bh() and then calls sk->sk_backlog_rcv() with bottom halves enabled. Typical sk_backlog_rcv handlers process the socket whose backlog is being drained, so the BH state at entry is irrelevant for the slocks they touch. pep_do_rcv() is different: when the inbound skb targets an existing PEP pipe, it forwards the skb to a different *child* socket via sk_receive_skb(). That helper takes the child slock with bh_lock_sock_nested(), which is just spin_lock_nested() and assumes BH is already off. The same child slock therefore ends up acquired with BH on (process path) and with BH off (softirq path): process context softirq context --------------- --------------- release_sock(listener) __netif_receive_skb() __release_sock() phonet_rcv() spin_unlock_bh() __sk_receive_skb(listener) [BH now ENABLED] [BH already disabled] sk_backlog_rcv: sk_backlog_rcv: pep_do_rcv() pep_do_rcv() sk_receive_skb(child) sk_receive_skb(child) bh_lock_sock_nested(child) bh_lock_sock_nested(child) => SOFTIRQ-ON-W => IN-SOFTIRQ-W Lockdep flags this as inconsistent lock state, and it can become a real self-deadlock if a softirq on the same CPU tries to receive to the same child socket while its slock is held in the BH-enabled path: WARNING: inconsistent lock state inconsistent {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} -> {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} usage. (slock-AF_PHONET/1){+.?.}-{3:3}, at: __sk_receive_skb+0x1cf/0x900 __sk_receive_skb net/core/sock.c:563 sk_receive_skb include/net/sock.h:2022 [inline] pep_do_rcv net/phonet/pep.c:675 sk_backlog_rcv include/net/sock.h:1190 __release_sock net/core/sock.c:3216 release_sock net/core/sock.c:3815 pep_sock_accept net/phonet/pep.c:879 Wrap the forwarded sk_receive_skb() in local_bh_disable() / local_bh_enable() so the child slock is always acquired with BH off. local_bh_disable() nests safely on the softirq path. Discovered via in-house syzkaller fuzzing; the same root cause also on the linux-6.1.y syzbot dashboard as extid 44f0626dd6284f02663c. Reproduced under KASAN + LOCKDEP + PROVE_LOCKING, reproducer: https://pastebin.com/A3t8xzCR

At a glance

Exploitability

Can be exploited locally on the machine with a low-privilege account. High risk of service disruption.

Exploit odds

0.1% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).

Fix

A patch, advisory or fixed version is referenced. Upgrade or apply it.

Timeline

1. 2026-07-19 16:17 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
2. 2026-08-13 15:32 UTC Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

• Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
• Exploit odds: 0.1% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
• Severity: 5.5 MEDIUM (CVSS).
• Fix: a patch or advisory is linked.

Details

Published

2026-07-19 16:17 UTC

Last modified

2026-08-13 15:32 UTC

Exploit probability

0.1% · EPSS, next 30 days

Record status

Analyzed

Affected

• Linux Kernel < 5.10.258
• Linux Kernel < 5.15.209
• Linux Kernel < 6.1.175
• Linux Kernel < 6.6.142
• Linux Kernel < 6.12.92
• Linux Kernel < 6.18.34
• Linux Kernel < 7.0.11
• Linux Kernel 7.1

Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 5.5

Attack vector

Local

Complexity

Low

Privileges needed

Low

User interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

None

Integrity

None

Availability

High

Is it in your code?

Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.

Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2026-64177.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2026-64177. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.

Copy as ticket · More options · Status badge