In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
netlink: avoid infinite retry looping in netlink_unicast()
netlink_attachskb() checks for the socket's read memory allocation constraints. Firstly, it has:
rmem < READ_ONCE(sk->sk_rcvbuf)
to check if the just increased rmem value fits into the socket's receive buffer. If not, it proceeds and tries to wait for the memory under:
rmem + skb->truesize > READ_ONCE(sk->sk_rcvbuf)
The checks don't cover the case when skb->truesize + sk->sk_rmem_alloc is equal to sk->sk_rcvbuf. Thus the function neither successfully accepts these conditions, nor manages to reschedule the task - and is called in retry loop for indefinite time which is caught as:
rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU rcu: 0-....: (25999 ticks this GP) idle=ef2/1/0x4000000000000000 softirq=262269/262269 fqs=6212 (t=26000 jiffies g=230833 q=259957) NMI backtrace for cpu 0 CPU: 0 PID: 22 Comm: kauditd Not tainted 5.10.240 #68 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.17.0-4.fc42 04/01/2014 Call Trace: <IRQ> dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:120 nmi_cpu_backtrace.cold lib/nmi_backtrace.c:105 nmi_trigger_cpumask_backtrace lib/nmi_backtrace.c:62 rcu_dump_cpu_stacks kernel/rcu/tree_stall.h:335 rcu_sched_clock_irq.cold kernel/rcu/tree.c:2590 update_process_times kernel/time/timer.c:1953 tick_sched_handle kernel/time/tick-sched.c:227 tick_sched_timer kernel/time/tick-sched.c:1399 __hrtimer_run_queues kernel/time/hrtimer.c:1652 hrtimer_interrupt kernel/time/hrtimer.c:1717 __sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c:1113 asm_call_irq_on_stack arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:808 </IRQ>
netlink_attachskb net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1234 netlink_unicast net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1349 kauditd_send_queue kernel/audit.c:776 kauditd_thread kernel/audit.c:897 kthread kernel/kthread.c:328 ret_from_fork arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:304
Restore the original behavior of the check which commit in Fixes accidentally missed when restructuring the code.
Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org).
| Software | From | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.1.146 | 6.1.149 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.6.99 | 6.6.103 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.12.39 | 6.12.43 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.15.7 | 6.15.11 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.16.1 | 6.16.2 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.4.296 | 5.4.296.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.10.240 | 5.10.240.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.15.189 | 5.15.189.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.16 | 6.16.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.16-rc6 | 6.16-rc6.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.16-rc7 | 6.16-rc7.x |
| debian / debian_linux | 11.0 | 11.0.x |
A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.
CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.
A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.
Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.
Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.
SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.