CVE-2026-74586
CVE CVE-2026-74586EUVD EUVD-2026-64523Published 2026-08-22T15:31:39.000ZLast changed 2026-08-25T05:40:12.000ZCVSS 9.8
What the advisory describes
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sctp: clear new_transport when removing a peer sctp_process_asconf_param() stores a newly added peer transport in asoc->new_transport. After all parameters in the ASCONF chunk have been processed, sctp_sf_do_asconf() uses this pointer to send a HEARTBEAT to the new transport. An authenticated ASCONF from a remote SCTP peer can add a transport and remove it again with a wildcard DEL-IP parameter in the same chunk. The wildcard deletion preserves the transport on which the ASCONF arrived, but removes the newly added transport through sctp_assoc_del_nonprimary_peers(). The removal does not clear asoc->new_transport, leaving it pointing to the removed transport. sctp_sf_do_asconf() then creates a HEARTBEAT whose chunk->transport points to the removed transport without holding a transport reference. During local address replacement, src_out_of_asoc_ok keeps this HEARTBEAT on control_chunk_list. After the transport is freed by RCU, a successful ASCONF_ACK for the replacement address releases the queued HEARTBEAT and sctp_outq_select_transport() reads the freed transport's state. The issue was found during a static audit of SCTP objects. With an authenticated peer, the reproducer triggered the same KASAN report in 2 of 2 unpatched runs on a KASAN-enabled netdev/main kernel: BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in sctp_outq_select_transport Read of size 4 at addr ffff88800b9bd95c by task python3/197 Call Trace: sctp_outq_select_transport+0x549/0x8b0 [sctp] sctp_outq_flush+0x306/0x2c60 [sctp] sctp_transport_immediate_rtx+0xaf/0x260 [sctp] sctp_process_asconf_ack+0xa48/0xf70 [sctp] Allocated by task 197: sctp_transport_new+0x68/0x650 [sctp] sctp_assoc_add_peer+0x258/0x12a0 [sctp] sctp_process_asconf+0x5e9/0x1090 [sctp] Last potentially related work creation: __call_rcu_common.constprop.0+0x77/0xb70 sctp_assoc_del_nonprimary_peers+0x7c/0xd0 [sctp] sctp_process_asconf+0xd9c/0x1090 [sctp] The first invalid access was a four-byte read of transport->state at net/sctp/outqueue.c:833. The same reproducer completed the full authenticated ASCONF and local-address replacement sequence with this change without a KASAN report or oops. Clear new_transport when its peer is removed, before it can be used to create the HEARTBEAT.
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.
- Linux — Linux patch: 5.10.265; 6af29ccc223b0feb6fc6112281c3fa3cdb1afddf <3b539b317cd052236fed0350364ff1268996ba46; 6af29ccc223b0feb6fc6112281c3fa3cdb1afddf <beb33f8ee1ca83acddb2a5ae80f3d22ec550b4c3; patch: 0; patch: 6.6.152; 6af29ccc223b0feb6fc6112281c3fa3cdb1afddf <163847552a571bd55094291f4ffcdc1de0f14a7b; patch: 5.15.216; 6af29ccc223b0feb6fc6112281c3fa3cdb1afddf <31efa656cf6aface26e88f038c14f22ee6ca1500; 6af29ccc223b0feb6fc6112281c3fa3cdb1afddf <c0f973bb5118dd1b146cda3fcc8af6f6057befec; patch: 7.2; patch: 6.18.45; 6af29ccc223b0feb6fc6112281c3fa3cdb1afddf <291accf36febce751021888de5f15090f4875b56; 3.2; patch: 7.1.9; 6af29ccc223b0feb6fc6112281c3fa3cdb1afddf <ca33df36aa0143a1d04f57d2086020c12e7eddb7; 6af29ccc223b0feb6fc6112281c3fa3cdb1afddf <db9d8e3b670f841755bc2018f178472dc6064d27; patch: 6.1.183; patch: 6.12.104
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.
- Linux — Linux
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 daysPatchlage 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.