CVE-2026-72123

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: can: bcm: defer rx_op deallocation to workqueue to fix thrtimer UAF Commit f1b4e32aca08 ("can: bcm: use call_rcu() instead of costly synchronize_rcu()") replaced synchronize_rcu() in bcm_delete_rx_op() with call_rcu() and introduced the RX_NO_AUTOTIMER flag. However, this flag check was omitted for thrtimer in the packet rx fast-path. During BCM RX operation teardown, a concurrent RCU reader (bcm_rx_handler) can race and re-arm thrtimer via bcm_rx_update_and_send() after call_rcu() has been scheduled. Once the RCU grace period elapses, bcm_op is freed. The subsequently firing thrtimer then dereferences the deallocated op, causing a UAF. Adding flag checks to the rx fast-path (bcm_rx_update_and_send) does not fully close the TOCTOU race and introduces latency for every CAN frame. Conversely, calling hrtimer_cancel() directly inside the RCU callback (softirq context) is fatal as hrtimer_cancel() can sleep, triggering a "scheduling while atomic" panic. Resolve this by deferring the timer cancellation and memory free to a dedicated unbound workqueue (bcm_wq). The RCU callback now queues a work item to bcm_wq, which safely cancels both timers and deallocates memory in sleepable process context. A dedicated workqueue is used to prevent system-wide WQ saturation and is cleanly flushed/destroyed on module unload to avoid rmmod page faults. Since the deferred work can now outlive the calling context by an unbounded amount, also take a reference on op->sk when it is assigned and drop it only once the deferred work has cancelled both timers, so a socket can no longer be freed out from under a still-armed timer whose callback (bcm_send_to_user()) dereferences op->sk.

At a glance

Exploitability

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

Exploit odds

0.2% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).

Fix

No patch or advisory is linked yet. Look at mitigations or restrict exposure.

Timeline

1. 2026-08-09 03:40 UTC ReservedThe CVE id was reserved by its CNA
2. 2026-08-15 06:21 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
3. 2026-10-16 19:17 UTC Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

• Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
• Exploit odds: 0.2% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
• Severity: 7.8 HIGH (CVSS).
• Fix: none linked yet, which raises it.

Details

Published

2026-08-15 06:21 UTC

Last modified

2026-10-16 19:17 UTC

Exploit probability

0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days

Record status

Received

Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 7.8

Attack vector

Local

Complexity

Low

Privileges needed

Low

User interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

High

Integrity

High

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-2026-72123.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2026-72123. 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