CVE-2026-98256

HIGHPre-NVD 7.87.8
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

Score 7.8 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-10-06. A secondary CVSS source baseline 7.8; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — Patch released this weekElevated

Also known asEUVD-2026-93184 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Public exploit or proof-of-concept code is available
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.1%CVSS: 7.8Exploit: Public PoCExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

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

signal: Prevent exec() race

Hyunwoo debugged the following KASAN UAF splat:

BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in __send_signal_locked+0xb27/0xba0 Write of size 8 at addr ffff888007ed80c8 by task poc/79 ... Call Trace: __send_signal_locked+0xb27/0xba0 do_send_sig_info+0xa7/0x160 do_send_specific+0x76/0xa0 __x64_sys_tgkill+0x193/0x270 ... Allocated by task 80: do_timer_create+0x1a4/0x1030 __x64_sys_timer_create+0x145/0x190 ... Freed by task 12: kmem_cache_free_bulk+0x1f8/0x4a0 kvfree_rcu_bulk+0x14f/0x1c0 kfree_rcu_work+0x128/0x1a0 ... Last potentially related work creation: kvfree_call_rcu+0x39/0x390 __flush_itimer_signals+0x211/0x320 flush_itimer_signals+0x47/0x90 begin_new_exec+0xa6b/0x28c0

It turned out that this happens with a non-leader exec() as Hyunwoo explained:

de_thread() calls exchange_tids() before release_task(leader), so the struct pid held by a SIGEV_THREAD_ID timer created against the leader's tid now points to the thread which called execve(). pid_task() returns that thread and lock_task_sighand() on it succeeds.

If the timer signal is blocked, its sigqueue stays queued on the leader's task::pending. The next expiry of that timer can then run while release_task() flushes the queue.

posixtimer_send_sigqueue() checks whether the sigqueue is already queued with a plain list_empty(), which only reads list_head::next. list_del_init() is not atomic and INIT_LIST_HEAD() stores list_head::next before list_head::prev, so the check can pass in between. list_add_tail() queues the entry on the task::pending of the live thread, and the list_head::prev store from the flush then overwrites the list_head::prev link that list_add_tail() has just set.

__flush_itimer_signals() does not undo that either. With list_head::prev pointing at the entry itself, its list_del_init() only stores the same values again, so the entry is not removed from the list. It is still there after the last reference is dropped and the timer is freed by RCU, and the list_add_tail() of a later tgkill() follows that list_head::prev into the freed timer.

This problem surfaced with the recent commit which moved the sigqueue flush out of the sighand lock held region.

Hyonwoo proposed to fix this by using list_del_init_careful(), but that just papers over the problem. After some disucssions and various attempts to solve it, Eric pointed out that there is no reason to flush task::pending late in release_task() and it should be done in exit_signals() already.

As nothing can collect and deliver signals which are queued in a dying task's pending queue, there is no reason to delay it further.

But it has to be ensured that no signals can be queued into it after that point. exit_signals() sets PF_EXITING in task::flags, which can be used as an indicator for this.

Cure it by:

  • Preventing signal queueing for task private signals (PIDTYPE_PID) when
the task has PF_EXITING set in __send_signal_locked() and in posixtimer_send_sigqueue().
  • Protecting the unlocked setting of PF_EXITING in exit_signals() for the
task group empty and the group exit case with sighand lock
  • Flushing task::pending signals right there.

Optimize that by moving the whole pending list to an on-stack list head under sighand lock and free the signals without the lock held.

There has been quite some discussion about the lockless flush and the non-leader exec case on weakly ordered systems. The problem is that a third party which tries to send a posix timer signal relies on the PID lookup to find the target task and that lookup might result in the new leader when the signal was originaly directed to the old leader. In case that the signal was queued on the old leader then the lockless flush raised a concern over the following situation:

old_leader new_leader third party

A: flush_list() // list_del_in ---truncated---

CVSS v3
7.8
EG Score
7.8HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
51
EG Risk 51/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity78% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.8 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation40% × 40%
EchelonGraph's fixed weight for EG-KEV Tier 3 (Elevated): a constant, not a probability.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's BOD 26-04 default: no one has published Automatable for this CVE, and CISA treats it as “no” for a CVE not in KEV.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.
Exploitation public PoC (exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
EPSS PROB
0.1%
EPSS %ILE
3rd
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.8 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-11-12). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track* at medium mission impactTrack at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low, Track* at medium and Attend at high mission impact.

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.

Exploitation public PoC (exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from Vulnrichment. EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

October 6, 2026

Last Modified

October 19, 2026

Advisory Details (3)

Auto-updated Oct 7, 2026
Patch available.
Web page

signal: Prevent exec() race - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d2710c8d938ae6a825a6463158e6e6f31eac792a
Web page

signal: Prevent exec() race - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/934bd95f1a6404dbb845951b823547abab05a649
Web page

signal: Prevent exec() race - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/621c365739828900f32a0c1cdfe5387528a62176

Patch Availability(6)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
ubuntulinux-tools-azure-lts-26.04 (7.0.0-1020.21) @ resolute2026-11-12ubuntu
ubuntulinux-virtual-hwe-24.04-edge (7.0.0-42.42~24.04.1) @ noble2026-11-12ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-realtime-hwe-26.04-edge (7.0.0-43.43.1) @ resolute2026-11-12ubuntu
ubuntulinux-tools-oem-7.0 (7.0.0-1017.17) @ resolute2026-11-12ubuntu
redhatkernel-0:6.12.0-264.14.1.el10_32026-11-11redhat
redhatkernel-0:6.12.0-211.67.1.el10_22026-10-19redhat

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 7.2~rc7-1~exp1 (182 versions)
  • every version up to 7.2.8-1: fixed in 7.2.8-1
—

Additional Vendor Advisories

(4)

Vendors that published advisories for this CVE beyond the curated set above. Broader coverage but minimal per-row detail — click through for the original advisory.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 8× in last 7d / 41× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed its CVE.org record (CNA or CISA ADP). An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). "EchelonGraph re-scored" is our own recompute of this CVE's score, not an update from a source, and is not counted in the refreshes above. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-11-12 17:43 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  2. 2026-11-12 17:43 UTCVendor advisory
  3. 2026-11-12 17:43 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  4. 2026-11-11 16:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  5. 2026-11-10 16:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  6. 2026-11-09 16:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  7. 2026-11-08 16:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  8. 2026-11-07 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  9. 2026-11-06 16:40 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  10. 2026-11-05 16:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  11. 2026-11-05 09:34 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  12. 2026-11-05 09:34 UTCVendor advisory
  13. 2026-11-05 09:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  14. 2026-11-05 00:34 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  15. 2026-11-05 00:34 UTCVendor advisory
  16. 2026-11-05 00:34 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  17. 2026-11-04 16:37 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  18. 2026-11-03 16:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  19. 2026-11-02 16:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  20. 2026-11-01 16:36 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  21. 2026-10-31 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  22. 2026-10-30 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  23. 2026-10-29 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  24. 2026-10-28 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  25. 2026-10-28 16:25 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
Show 65 more
  1. 2026-10-28 16:25 UTCVendor advisory
  2. 2026-10-28 16:25 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  3. 2026-10-27 18:39 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  4. 2026-10-27 18:39 UTCVendor advisory
  5. 2026-10-27 18:39 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  6. 2026-10-27 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  7. 2026-10-26 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  8. 2026-10-25 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 3rd percentile
  9. 2026-10-25 13:47 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  10. 2026-10-24 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  11. 2026-10-23 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  12. 2026-10-22 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  13. 2026-10-21 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  14. 2026-10-20 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  15. 2026-10-19 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  16. 2026-10-19 10:29 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  17. 2026-10-19 10:29 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  18. 2026-10-19 09:42 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  19. 2026-10-19 09:42 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  20. 2026-10-18 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  21. 2026-10-18 02:56 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  22. 2026-10-17 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  23. 2026-10-16 16:45 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  24. 2026-10-15 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  25. 2026-10-14 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  26. 2026-10-13 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  27. 2026-10-13 03:58 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  28. 2026-10-13 03:57 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  29. 2026-10-12 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  30. 2026-10-12 14:38 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  31. 2026-10-11 22:22 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  32. 2026-10-11 19:10 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  33. 2026-10-11 16:25 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  34. 2026-10-11 13:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  35. 2026-10-11 13:37 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  36. 2026-10-11 11:20 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  37. 2026-10-11 11:20 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  38. 2026-10-11 00:15 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  39. 2026-10-11 00:14 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  40. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  41. 2026-10-10 13:09 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  42. 2026-10-10 02:06 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  43. 2026-10-10 02:06 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  44. 2026-10-09 20:08 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  45. 2026-10-09 15:04 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  46. 2026-10-09 03:47 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  47. 2026-10-09 03:47 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  48. 2026-10-08 17:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  49. 2026-10-08 16:45 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  50. 2026-10-08 05:33 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  51. 2026-10-08 05:33 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  52. 2026-10-07 23:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  53. 2026-10-07 18:31 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  54. 2026-10-07 18:31 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8 · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  55. 2026-10-07 07:29 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  56. 2026-10-07 07:29 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8
  57. 2026-10-07 06:57 UTCEchelonGraph re-scoredFirst assessed: 7.8 HIGH
  58. 2026-10-07 06:57 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8
  59. 2026-10-07 06:56 UTCMITRE cvelistV5CVSS v3 → 7.8 · severity → HIGH
  60. 2026-10-06 15:19 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.2% · 6th percentile
  61. 2026-10-06 09:46 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8
  62. 2026-10-06 09:44 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-jj25-6g4q-4cf8
  63. 2026-10-06 09:28 UTCNVD update
  64. 2026-10-06 08:55 UTCEchelonGraph re-scored
  65. 2026-10-06 08:52 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Publicly available exploits

(1 reference)

Public exploit code is referenced for this CVE (1 GitHub PoC). Defenders should treat patch urgency accordingly.

  • GitHub PoCylh440104/InfinityCore-Android-CVE-2026-98256
    Published Oct 18, 2026

    Android/ARM64 port

    Open source ↗

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-98256?
CVE-2026-98256 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 6, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: signal: Prevent exec() race Hyunwoo debugged the following KASAN UAF splat: BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in __send_signal_locked+0xb27/0xba0 Write of size 8 at addr ffff888007ed80c8 by task poc/79 ... Call Trace:…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-98256 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-98256 was published on October 6, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 19, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-98256 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-98256 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.1% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (3rd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-98256?
CVE-2026-98256 has a CVSS base score of 7.8 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-98256?
A fix for CVE-2026-98256 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-98256 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-98256

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-98256?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.