- —Not scoredno CVSS score yet
- 0.21%Exploitation in 30 daysEPSS · top 89% of all CVEs
- NoKnown exploitednot in CISA's KEV catalog
- NonePublic exploitsnone known yet
Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fs/resctrl: Fix UAF from worker threads when domains are removed The mbm_handle_overflow() and cqm_handle_limbo() workers read event counters and may sleep while doing so. They are scheduled via delayed_work embedded in struct rdt_l3_mon_domain. Architecture allocates and frees these domains from CPU hotplug callbacks under cpus_write_lock(), and the workers acquire cpus_read_lock() to keep the domain alive across their access. A use-after-free can occur when a worker is blocked waiting for cpus_read_lock() while the hotplug core holds cpus_write_lock(): the architecture frees the rdt_l3_mon_domain that contains the worker's work_struct. When the worker unblocks, the container_of() it performs on the embedded work pointer dereferences freed memory. Drop cpus_read_lock() from the workers and instead drain pending and in-flight work synchronously before the architecture can free the domain. Since architecture offlines the domain under cpus_write_lock() after it has been unlinked from the RCU list and a grace period has elapsed, no new work can be scheduled. The cancel only needs to wait out existing work. Drop rdtgroup_mutex during CPU offline around cancel_delayed_work_sync() so that a worker waiting on the mutex can complete before re-pinning the work on a different CPU. When offlining a CPU the architecture may iterate over resources in any order. For example, the MBA control domain may be offlined before or after a corresponding L3 monitor domain. Ensure that resctrl fs cancels the workers no matter what order the architecture offlines the domains.
Timeline
ID reserved
By Linux
Published
- 32 days later
· 32 days later
Record updated
Changes after publication (a new score, a public exploit, EPSS crossing 1, 10 or 50 %, leaving KEV) are kept since November 2026; earlier ones are not known.
Scores
No CVSS score yet: neither the CNA, CISA nor NVD has scored this CVE. NVD status: Received.
- EPSS (exploitation in 30 days)
- 0.21% · top 89% of all CVEs (11 Nov 2026)
The list uses the assigner's score when there is one, then CISA's, then NVD's: Not scored.
Affected products
- affected 24247aeeabe99eab13b798ccccc2dec066dd6f07 – < 6a2e023429a41afd0d9dfe74268aa51774a953ff
- affected 24247aeeabe99eab13b798ccccc2dec066dd6f07 – < b86dbfe4583bf134932a6cc45bf25b12c10a0b2f
- affected 24247aeeabe99eab13b798ccccc2dec066dd6f07 – < 2566b5cd6a275c124e8f154fef6e815f92ec8d5c
- affected 4.14
- unaffected < 4.14
- unaffected 6.18.57 – ≤ 6.18.*
- unaffected 7.2.6 – ≤ 7.2.*
- unaffected 7.3 – ≤ *
References
Sources
The same CVE in the primary databases and aggregators, to check against.
- CVE.org record (opens in a new tab)
- CVE List JSON (GitHub) (opens in a new tab)
- NVD (opens in a new tab)
- FIRST EPSS (opens in a new tab)
- EUVD EUVD-2026-82207 (opens in a new tab)
- OSV.dev (opens in a new tab)
- GitHub Advisories (opens in a new tab)
- CIRCL Vulnerability-Lookup (opens in a new tab)
Badge for a README or a ticket
[](https://cveledger.app/cve/CVE-2026-93099)Record last updated .