Linux: Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization
CVE-2026-68382 is a high-severity concurrent execution using shared resource with improper synchronization vulnerability in Linux, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.8 out of 10. It can be exploited with local access to the system by an attacker with a low-privileged account, without any action from a user. The record lists versions 81f70f130eff985fb678d8b891c960381bc7e900, 03d6f83979b0d75a0b0893dfe1735ec93facf515, 9b7e60184f4b22e893d4ae95234d5f26261a430c 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 0.11% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update Linux to 81f70f130eff985fb678d8b891c960381bc7e900 or 03d6f83979b0d75a0b0893dfe1735ec93facf515 or 9b7e60184f4b22e893d4ae95234d5f26261a430c or 6.11, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linux | Linux | 2d2be279f1ca9e7288282d4214f16eea8a727cdb up to, but not including, 81f70f130eff985fb678d8b891c960381bc7e900; 2d2be279f1ca9e7288282d4214f16eea8a727cdb up to, but not including, 03d6f83979b0d75a0b0893dfe1735ec93facf515; 2d2be279f1ca9e7288282d4214f16eea8a727cdb up to, but not including, 9b7e60184f4b22e893d4ae95234d5f26261a430c; 272b0e78874586d6ccae04079d75b27b47705544; 421c74670b0f9d5c007f1276d3647aa58f407fde; 6.10.14 up to, but not including, 6.11; 6.11.3 up to, but not including, 6.12; 6.12 | 81f70f130eff985fb678d8b891c960381bc7e900, 03d6f83979b0d75a0b0893dfe1735ec93facf515, 9b7e60184f4b22e893d4ae95234d5f26261a430c, 6.11, 6.12 |
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
- LocalThe attacker needs local access or must trick a user into running something.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- LowA basic user account is enough.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by CNA.
Official description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/xe/guc: Hold device ref until queue teardown completes GuC exec queue destruction can run asynchronously. If the final device put happens from a destroy worker, drmm cleanup can end up draining the same workqueue and deadlock. Hold a drm_device reference for the queue lifetime and drop it after queue teardown completes. This keeps drmm cleanup from running while async destroy work is still pending. Move GuC destroy work to a module-lifetime Xe workqueue and flush it on PCI remove so hot-unbind/rebind still waits for pending destroy work. With queue-held device refs, guc_submit_sw_fini() cannot run with live GuC IDs. Replace the fini wait with an assertion and remove the unused fini_wq. v2: - Rebase v3: - Switch to queue-lifetime drm_dev_get()/drm_dev_put() model. (Matt) - Queue async teardown on system_dfl_wq instead of xe->destroy_wq. (Matt) - Drop separate deferred drm_dev_put worker. - Remove stale drain_workqueue(xe->destroy_wq) from guc_submit_sw_fini(). v4: - Replace the guc_submit_sw_fini() wait with an assertion and remove the now-unused fini_wq. (sashiko) v5: - Move destroy work to a module-lifetime Xe workqueue instead of system_dfl_wq. (Matt) - Flush the module-lifetime destroy workqueue during PCI remove to preserve the old device-remove wait semantics. v6: - Keep SVM pagemap destroy work on the per-device destroy_wq to avoid letting it outlive the xe_device/drm_device. (Sashiko) - Use WQ_MEM_RECLAIM for xe->destroy_wq because SVM pagemap destroy work can be queued from the reclaim path. v7: - Drop the per-device xe->destroy_wq and use the module-level destroy WQ for SVM pagemap destroy as well. (Matt) - Rename xe_exec_queue_destroy_wq_*() helpers to xe_destroy_wq_*() helpers because the WQ is no longer exec-queue specific. (Matt) v8: - Rebase. v9: - Keep SVM pagemap destroy work on the per-device WQ_MEM_RECLAIM destroy_wq because it can be queued from reclaim and embeds the dev_pagemap used by devres teardown. (Sashiko) - Keep the module-level destroy WQ GuC-only and drop WQ_MEM_RECLAIM from it. - Update the module-WQ kdoc to document the GuC/SVM split. v10: - Keep xe->destroy_wq per-cpu while adding WQ_MEM_RECLAIM to fix the workqueue allocation warning. v11: - Drop the SVM pagemap destroy comment as it was revision-specific. (Thomas) v12: - Rebase. (cherry picked from commit da1124abac689cc2b1d8995e5f0a816f8a122edb)
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization
The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- In languages that support it, use synchronization primitives. Only wrap these around critical code to minimize the impact on performance.
- Use thread-safe capabilities such as the data access abstraction in Spring.
- Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring. Additionally, this will minimize the amount of synchronization necessary and may even help to reduce the likelihood of a denial of service where an attacker may be able to repeatedly trigger a critical section (CWE-400).
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other references
Recent Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization vulnerabilities
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.