CVE-2026-64262 — linux / linux_kernel
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
fuse-uring: end fuse_req on io-uring cancel task work
When io_uring delivers task work with tw.cancel set (PF_EXITING, PF_KTHREAD fallback, or percpu_ref_is_dying on the ring context), fuse_uring_send_in_task() takes the cancel branch, assigns -ECANCELED, and falls through to fuse_uring_send(). That path only flips the entry to FRRS_USERSPACE and completes the io_uring cmd; it never discharges the ring entry's owning reference to the fuse_req that fuse_uring_add_req_to_ring_ent() handed it at dispatch time.
fuse_uring_send_in_task()
tw.cancel == true
err = -ECANCELED
fuse_uring_send(ent, cmd, err, issue_flags)
ent->state = FRRS_USERSPACE
list_move(&ent->list, &queue->ent_in_userspace)
ent->cmd = NULL
io_uring_cmd_done(-ECANCELED)
/* ent->fuse_req still set, req still hashed */
The fuse_req stays linked on fpq->processing[hash] and fuse_request_end() is never invoked. The originating syscall thread blocks in D-state in request_wait_answer() until fuse_abort_conn() runs, which can be the entire connection lifetime. For FR_BACKGROUND requests fc->num_background is never decremented either, so repeated cancels inflate the counter until max_background is hit and all later background ops stall. tw.cancel does not imply a connection abort (e.g. a single io_uring worker thread exits while the fuse connection stays up), so this cannot be left for fuse_abort_conn() to clean up.
Ending the req but still routing the entry through fuse_uring_send() is not enough: that leaves a req-less entry on ent_in_userspace, and ent_list_request_expired() dereferences ent->fuse_req unconditionally on the head of that list, which would then NULL-deref.
Fix the cancel branch to release the entry directly. Remove it from the queue, complete the io_uring cmd, end the fuse_req, free the entry, and drop its queue_refs (waking the teardown waiter if it was the last).
| Software | From | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.14 | 6.18.39 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.19 | 7.1.4 |
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.