BDU:2026-14066

CVE-2026-53260

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tcp: Add preempt_{disable,enable}_nested() in reqsk_queue_hash_req(). syzbot reported a weird reqsk->rsk_refcnt underflow in __inet_csk_reqsk_queue_drop(). The captured reqsk_put() in __inet_csk_reqsk_queue_drop() is called only when it successfully removes reqsk from ehash. Moreover, reqsk_timer_handler() calls another reqsk_put() after that. This indicates that the reqsk was missing both refcnts for ehash and the timer itself. Since all the syzbot reports had PREEMPT_RT enabled, the only possible scenario is that reqsk_queue_hash_req() is preempted after mod_timer() and before refcount_set(), and then the timer triggered after 1s aborts the reqsk due to its listener's close(). Let's wrap mod_timer() and refcount_set() with preempt_disable_nested() and preempt_enable_nested(). Note that inet_ehash_insert() holds the normal spin_lock() (mutex in PREEMPT_RT), so it must be called outside of preempt_disable_nested(), ...

CVE-2026-53260

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tcp: Add preempt_{disable,enable}_nested() in reqsk_queue_hash_req(). syzbot reported a weird reqsk->rsk_refcnt underflow in __inet_csk_reqsk_queue_drop(). The captured reqsk_put() in __inet_csk_reqsk_queue_drop() is called only when it successfully removes reqsk from ehash. Moreover, reqsk_timer_handler() calls another reqsk_put() after that. This indicates that the reqsk was missing both refcnts for ehash and the timer itself. Since all the syzbot reports had PREEMPT_RT enabled, the only possible scenario is that reqsk_queue_hash_req() is preempted after mod_timer() and before refcount_set(), and then the timer triggered after 1s aborts the reqsk due to its listener's close(). Let's wrap mod_timer() and refcount_set() with preempt_disable_nested() and preempt_enable_nested(). Note that inet_ehash_insert() holds the normal spin_lock() (mutex in PREEMPT_RT), so it must be called outside of preempt_disable_nested(), ...

CVE-2026-53260

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tcp: Add preempt_{disable,enable}_nested() in reqsk_queue_hash_req(). syzbot reported a weird reqsk->rsk_refcnt underflow in __inet_csk_reqsk_queue_drop(). The captured reqsk_put() in __inet_csk_reqsk_queue_drop() is called only when it successfully removes reqsk from ehash. Moreover, reqsk_timer_handler() calls another reqsk_put() after that. This indicates that the reqsk was missing both refcnts for ehash and the timer itself. Since all the syzbot reports had PREEMPT_RT enabled, the only possible scenario is that reqsk_queue_hash_req() is preempted after mod_timer() and before refcount_set(), and then the timer triggered after 1s aborts the reqsk due to its listener's close(). Let's wrap mod_timer() and refcount_set() with preempt_disable_nested() and preempt_enable_nested(). Note that inet_ehash_insert() holds the normal spin_lock() (mutex in PREEMPT_RT), so it must be called outside of preempt_disable_neste

CVE-2026-53260

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: t ...

GHSA-cmhx-q3fp-jhf6

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tcp: Add preempt_{disable,enable}_nested() in reqsk_queue_hash_req(). syzbot reported a weird reqsk->rsk_refcnt underflow in __inet_csk_reqsk_queue_drop(). The captured reqsk_put() in __inet_csk_reqsk_queue_drop() is called only when it successfully removes reqsk from ehash. Moreover, reqsk_timer_handler() calls another reqsk_put() after that. This indicates that the reqsk was missing both refcnts for ehash and the timer itself. Since all the syzbot reports had PREEMPT_RT enabled, the only possible scenario is that reqsk_queue_hash_req() is preempted after mod_timer() and before refcount_set(), and then the timer triggered after 1s aborts the reqsk due to its listener's close(). Let's wrap mod_timer() and refcount_set() with preempt_disable_nested() and preempt_enable_nested(). Note that inet_ehash_insert() holds the normal spin_lock() (mutex in PREEMPT_RT), so it must be called outside of preempt_disable_ne...