Patchlage

CVE-2026-74388

CVE CVE-2026-74388EUVD EUVD-2026-59535Published 2026-08-15T05:59:03.000ZLast changed 2026-08-17T05:46:37.000ZCVSS 7.8

What the advisory describes

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ALSA: seq: oss: Fix UAF at handling events with embedded SysEx data The OSS sequencer processes the input MIDI bytes into a sequencer event to be dispatched later (in snd_seq_oss_midi_putc() called from snd_seq_oss_process_event()). When it's a SysEx data, the event record contains data.ext.ptr pointer to the original SysEx bytes, and the referred data is copied into the pool afterwards at dispatching. The problem is that, if the sequencer port gets closed concurrently before the dispatch, the OSS sequencer core also releases the resources (in snd_seq_oss_midi_check_exit_port()), while the pending event may hold a stale pointer, eventually leading to a UAF at a later dispatch. Fortunately, there is already a refcounting mechanism (snd_use_lock_t) for the OSS MIDI device access, and for addressing the issue above, we just need to extend the refcount until the event gets dispatched. This patch extends snd_seq_oss_process_event() to give back the refcount object, which is in turn released after calling the sequencer dispatcher with the given event in the caller side. According to the original report, KASAN report as below: KASAN slab-use-after-free in snd_seq_event_dup+0x40c/0x470 RIP: 0033:0x7f2cb66a6340 Read of size 6 Call trace: dump_stack_lvl+0x73/0xb0 (?:?) print_report+0xd1/0x650 (?:?) srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5 (?:?) __virt_addr_valid+0x1a7/0x340 (?:?) kasan_complete_mode_report_info+0x64/0x200 (?:?) kasan_report+0xf7/0x130 (?:?) snd_seq_event_dup+0x40c/0x470 (?:?) kasan_check_range+0x10c/0x1c0 (?:?) __asan_memcpy+0x27/0x70 (?:?) snd_seq_event_dup+0x9/0x470 (?:?) snd_seq_client_enqueue_event+0x139/0x240 (?:?) _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x4b/0x60 (?:?) snd_seq_kernel_client_enqueue+0x102/0x120 (?:?) snd_seq_oss_write+0x416/0x4e0 (?:?) apparmor_file_permission+0x20/0x30 (?:?) odev_write+0x3b/0x60 (?:?) vfs_write+0x1ce/0x850 (?:?) lock_release+0xc8/0x2a0 (?:?) __kasan_check_write+0x18/0x20 (?:?) __mutex_unlock_slowpath+0x129/0x510 (?:?) ksys_write+0xe1/0x180 (?:?) mutex_unlock+0x16/0x20 (?:?) odev_ioctl+0x65/0xc0 (?:?) __x64_sys_write+0x46/0x60 (?:?) x64_sys_call+0x7d/0x20d0 (?:?) do_syscall_64+0xc1/0x360 (arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:87) entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f (?:?)

Source: EUVD (ENISA), in the words of the advisory.

Products the advisory names

These come from the advisory itself, not from any check we performed.

The versions shown are the advisory's own. Patchlage compares no version numbers and derives no judgement from them — which version is installed is something a person has to look up.

Carried in the product catalogue

An estate covering these products can be recorded in Patchlage. An advisory about them appears in the next morning's situation report.

Does this concern one of your customers?

This page cannot answer that — it does not know your estate. Whoever has recorded their environments gets the answer the morning after publication, together with a paragraph they can forward to the customer unedited.

Try it for 28 days

Patchlage reports hits and suspected hits. About everything else this system says nothing — neither this page nor the situation report ever claims that an estate is safe.