CVE-2026-46135 — linux / linux_kernel
Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
nvmet-tcp: fix race between ICReq handling and queue teardown
nvmet_tcp_handle_icreq() updates queue->state after sending an Initialization Connection Response (ICResp), but it does so without serializing against target-side queue teardown.
If an NVMe/TCP host sends an Initialization Connection Request (ICReq) and immediately closes the connection, target-side teardown may start in softirq context before io_work drains the already buffered ICReq. In that case, nvmet_tcp_schedule_release_queue() sets queue->state to NVMET_TCP_Q_DISCONNECTING and drops the queue reference under state_lock.
If io_work later processes that ICReq, nvmet_tcp_handle_icreq() can still overwrite the state back to NVMET_TCP_Q_LIVE. That defeats the DISCONNECTING-state guard in nvmet_tcp_schedule_release_queue() and allows a later socket state change to re-enter teardown and issue a second kref_put() on an already released queue.
The ICResp send failure path has the same problem. If teardown has already moved the queue to DISCONNECTING, a send error can still overwrite the state with NVMET_TCP_Q_FAILED, again reopening the window for a second teardown path to drop the queue reference.
Fix this by serializing both post-send state transitions with state_lock and bailing out if teardown has already started.
Use -ESHUTDOWN as an internal sentinel for that bail-out path rather than propagating it as a transport error like -ECONNRESET. Keep nvmet_tcp_socket_error() setting rcv_state to NVMET_TCP_RECV_ERR before honoring that sentinel so receive-side parsing stays quiesced until the existing release path completes.
| Software | From | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| linux / linux_kernel | 5.0 | 6.12.88 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.13 | 6.18.30 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.19 | 7.0.7 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 7.1-rc1 | 7.1-rc1.x |
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/49891c8fe0cb43fbbe480da1cdccfbbaeb820cb3
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/5293a8882c549fab4a878bc76b0b6c951f980a61
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/5f0b95ef68ab9afba75b20eebf436130f80c161a
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/67e1aaf93b495c2f10bc8a5fbba575fbb7f449b6
- https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/dcfe4d1f7960e7d1c01642318f3aae1a604f8508
Deep Security Visibility Without the Complexity
SynScan provides clear, real-time security insights so you can monitor your attack surface, spot risks early, and act fast—without extra complexity.
- No setup fees
- 5-min deployment
- Cancel anytime
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.