CVE-2026-80947
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
wifi: rtl8xxxu: fix use-after-free from rx_urb_wq on stop
rtl8xxxu arms rx_urb_wq from the RX completion path: rtl8xxxu_rx_complete() hands the URB to rtl8xxxu_queue_rx_urb(), which queues it on rx_urb_pending_list and, once the list grows past RTL8XXXU_RX_URB_PENDING_WATER, schedules rx_urb_wq. The worker rtl8xxxu_rx_urb_work() drains rx_urb_pending_list, recovers priv through container_of, and resubmits each URB through rtl8xxxu_submit_rx_urb(), which anchors it on rx_anchor and dereferences priv->udev.
rtl8xxxu_stop() cancels the sibling work items (c2hcmd_work, ra_watchdog, update_beacon_work) but never cancels rx_urb_wq, so a worker armed during the last burst of RX traffic can run rtl8xxxu_rx_urb_work() after rtl8xxxu_disconnect() has called ieee80211_free_hw(), which frees priv, producing a use-after-free. The window opens under active RX traffic (pending count above the watermark) followed by a disconnect.
There are two teardown races to close:
-
rtl8xxxu_queue_rx_urb() decided whether to enqueue under rx_urb_lock but called schedule_work() after dropping the lock. A completion that observed shutdown == false and released the lock could then call schedule_work() after rtl8xxxu_stop() had set shutdown and cancel_work_sync() had already returned, arming the worker to run after the teardown. Move schedule_work() under the same !shutdown branch so the arming decision is atomic with the shutdown check.
-
rtl8xxxu_rx_urb_work() anchors every URB it drained back onto rx_anchor through rtl8xxxu_submit_rx_urb(). A worker still running when usb_kill_anchored_urbs(&priv->rx_anchor) returned would submit a URB that escaped the kill. In rtl8xxxu_stop(), call cancel_work_sync(&priv->rx_urb_wq) before the kill so the worker is drained first.
After priv->shutdown is set under rx_urb_lock, completions can no longer queue rx_urb_wq. cancel_work_sync() then drains the last queued or running worker, and the following usb_kill_anchored_urbs() kills the URBs it may have submitted.
rtl8xxxu_disconnect() is covered because ieee80211_unregister_hw() guarantees .stop() runs for a live interface before ieee80211_free_hw() frees priv. The probe error path needs no cancel: rx_urb_wq is INIT_WORK()'d there but cannot have been scheduled, since no URB is submitted before ieee80211_register_hw() succeeds.
This bug was found by static analysis.
No affected software listed.
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.