CVE-2026-74506
What it is
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: afs: Fix UAF when sending a message In afs_make_call(), there's a race with async call reception and destruction. If a call is dispatched that doesn't have call->write_iter set (used to specify the data content for FS.StoreData), then the first rxrpc_kernel_send_data() will not set MSG_MORE in the msghdr. Once rxrpc_send_data() queues the last request packet, the response could come in at any time and cause the call to be completed and put. However, afs_make_call() will look at the call again to see it ->write_iter should be handled - something it's only allowed to do if it has its own ref on the call. Whilst this is the case for synchronous calls, it isn't true for async calls such as FS.FetchData. There's also a potential UAF in afs_make_call() in the event that an asynchronous call is being sent, but the call fails in some way (e.g. it gets aborted from the server). The problem there is that afs_make_call() tries to abort a call if the rxrpc send fails, but the asynchronous notification from rxrpc may have caused the afs_call to be torn down. generic/650 plays games with randomly taking CPUs offline, and can interject a significant delay such that the call is deallocated before afs_make_call() gets to check call->write_iter - and a UAF ensues (caught by KASAN). BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in afs_make_call+0x1c90/0x2210 [kafs] Read of size 8 at addr ffff888035e050e8 by task fsstress/1409 Fix this by making afs_make_op_call() give the op->call its own ref rather than transferring the caller's ref to it and then dropping the ref when afs_make_call() returns. This also means that the afs_make_call() func never loses its ref on the call now.
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
- 0.1% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).
- Fix
- No patch or advisory is linked yet. Look at mitigations or restrict exposure.
Timeline
- ReservedThe CVE id was reserved by its CNA
- PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
- 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: 7.8 HIGH (CVSS).
- Fix: none linked yet, which raises it.
Details
- Published
- Last modified
- Exploit probability
- 0.1% · 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
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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-2026-74506.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2026-74506. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.
