CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-68315NVD status: Received

Linux: Integer Overflow or Wraparound

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2026-68315 is a high-severity integer overflow or wraparound vulnerability in Linux, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.5 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. The record lists versions 61327d8e7cfb0259d527be17202630f556213249, 7cf7439948e3bf639119119922c88ec190874ca3, 60c47dea5d320d2fc706e9aad1db38a04df0a056 as the first without the flaw, so updating Linux to one of those releases or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.51% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Update Linux to 61327d8e7cfb0259d527be17202630f556213249 or 7cf7439948e3bf639119119922c88ec190874ca3 or 60c47dea5d320d2fc706e9aad1db38a04df0a056 or b255d8cd6cc68045ae9eecbac3b3c14e1f176c9b, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
  2. Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
LinuxLinux7f9d68ac944e24ee5f9ac8d059ca00b1c1d34137 up to, but not including, 61327d8e7cfb0259d527be17202630f556213249; 7f9d68ac944e24ee5f9ac8d059ca00b1c1d34137 up to, but not including, 7cf7439948e3bf639119119922c88ec190874ca3; 7f9d68ac944e24ee5f9ac8d059ca00b1c1d34137 up to, but not including, 60c47dea5d320d2fc706e9aad1db38a04df0a056; 7f9d68ac944e24ee5f9ac8d059ca00b1c1d34137 up to, but not including, b255d8cd6cc68045ae9eecbac3b3c14e1f176c9b; 7f9d68ac944e24ee5f9ac8d059ca00b1c1d34137 up to, but not including, 6f0e39d180cd7cced647381b6fa14fd83d261047; 7f9d68ac944e24ee5f9ac8d059ca00b1c1d34137 up to, but not including, 1a10fe1aa9c01f41b389a31906a77d538637c9d9; 7f9d68ac944e24ee5f9ac8d059ca00b1c1d34137 up to, but not including, 00ae679cb21a035491fdad8d58dc6d79cc68b675; 7f9d68ac944e24ee5f9ac8d059ca00b1c1d34137 up to, but not including, 18ae07691d43183d270de8be9dc8e027906015d9; and 1 more ranges61327d8e7cfb0259d527be17202630f556213249, 7cf7439948e3bf639119119922c88ec190874ca3, 60c47dea5d320d2fc706e9aad1db38a04df0a056, b255d8cd6cc68045ae9eecbac3b3c14e1f176c9b, 6f0e39d180cd7cced647381b6fa14fd83d261047, 1a10fe1aa9c01f41b389a31906a77d538637c9d9

Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.

How the severity score breaks down

Attack vector
NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
Scope
UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
Confidentiality
NoneNo data is disclosed.
Integrity
NoneNothing can be modified.
Availability
HighThe component can be taken down completely.

Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H. Scored by CNA.

Official description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sctp: validate stream count in sctp_process_strreset_inreq() When processing a RESET_IN_REQUEST from a peer, sctp_process_strreset_inreq() derives the stream count from the parameter length but does not check whether the resulting RESET_OUT_REQUEST would exceed SCTP_MAX_CHUNK_LEN. The OUT request header (sctp_strreset_outreq, 16 bytes) is 8 bytes larger than the IN request header (sctp_strreset_inreq, 8 bytes). Generally, the IP payload is bounded to 65535 bytes, so the stream list cannot be large enough to trigger the overflow. However, on interfaces with MTU > 65535 (e.g., loopback with IPv6 jumbograms), a stream list that fits within the incoming IN parameter can cause a __u16 overflow in sctp_make_strreset_req() when computing the OUT request size, leading to an undersized skb allocation and a kernel BUG: net/core/skbuff.c:207 skb_panic net/core/skbuff.c:2625 skb_put net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c:1535 sctp_addto_chunk net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c:3695 sctp_make_strreset_req net/sctp/stream.c:655 sctp_process_strreset_inreq The local setsockopt path validates the generated reset request size. However, for an incoming-only reset, it accounts for the smaller IN request even though the peer must generate an OUT request with the same stream list. Such a request cannot be completed successfully by the peer. Reject peer IN requests whose corresponding OUT request would exceed SCTP_MAX_CHUNK_LEN. Also tighten the local check so it does not send an IN request that would require an oversized OUT request from the peer.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Integer Overflow or Wraparound

The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Ensure that all protocols are strictly defined, such that all out-of-bounds behavior can be identified simply, and require strict conformance to the protocol.
  • Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. If possible, choose a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. Use libraries or frameworks that make it easier to handle numbers without unexpected consequences. Examples include safe integer handling packages such as SafeInt (C++) or IntegerLib (C or C++).

More Integer Overflow or Wraparound vulnerabilities (CWE-190)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Recent Integer Overflow or Wraparound vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.