Vulnerability Database

374,559

Total vulnerabilities in the database

CVE-2026-31502 — linux / linux_kernel

Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type ('Type Confusion')

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

team: fix header_ops type confusion with non-Ethernet ports

Similar to commit 950803f72547 ("bonding: fix type confusion in bond_setup_by_slave()") team has the same class of header_ops type confusion.

For non-Ethernet ports, team_setup_by_port() copies port_dev->header_ops directly. When the team device later calls dev_hard_header() or dev_parse_header(), these callbacks can run with the team net_device instead of the real lower device, so netdev_priv(dev) is interpreted as the wrong private type and can crash.

The syzbot report shows a crash in bond_header_create(), but the root cause is in team: the topology is gre -> bond -> team, and team calls the inherited header_ops with its own net_device instead of the lower device, so bond_header_create() receives a team device and interprets netdev_priv() as bonding private data, causing a type confusion crash.

Fix this by introducing team header_ops wrappers for create/parse, selecting a team port under RCU, and calling the lower device callbacks with port->dev, so each callback always sees the correct net_device context.

Also pass the selected lower device to the lower parse callback, so recursion is bounded in stacked non-Ethernet topologies and parse callbacks always run with the correct device context.

  • Published: Apr 22, 2026
  • Updated: Apr 28, 2026
  • CVE: CVE-2026-31502
  • Severity: High
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: High
  • Score: 7.8
  • AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

CWEs:

Frequently Asked Questions

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.