Linux: Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization
CVE-2026-98163 is a high-severity concurrent execution using shared resource with improper synchronization vulnerability in Linux, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.0 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 828938118d6c2bb711301748c3e39e4bed6a62f5, 057dac23d329d5c5ed62352f2659a39fd46c6d4a 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 828938118d6c2bb711301748c3e39e4bed6a62f5 or 057dac23d329d5c5ed62352f2659a39fd46c6d4a, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
- Update Linux Kernel to 7.2.8 or a later version.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Linux | Linux | 260fbcb92bbeacfcd050410fdc2d24ab15044400 up to, but not including, 828938118d6c2bb711301748c3e39e4bed6a62f5; 260fbcb92bbeacfcd050410fdc2d24ab15044400 up to, but not including, 057dac23d329d5c5ed62352f2659a39fd46c6d4a; 6.19 | 828938118d6c2bb711301748c3e39e4bed6a62f5, 057dac23d329d5c5ed62352f2659a39fd46c6d4a |
| Linux | Linux Kernel | 6.19 up to, but not including, 7.2.8; 7.3 | 7.2.8 |
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
- HighSuccess depends on conditions outside the attacker's control.
- 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:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by NVD.
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.8 | High | CNA |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.0 | High | NVD |
Official description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: cgroup: Avoid iteration of dying tasks with zero refcount The commit 260fbcb92bbea ("cgroup: Move dying_tasks cleanup from cgroup_task_release() to cgroup_task_free()") extended the lifetime of tasks on the dying_tasks list. The iterators have provision to go through dying_tasks because of dying threadgroup leaders or explicit CSS_TASK_ITER_WITH_DEAD, however, it was expected that such tasks can obtain a new reference (that is possible before cgroup_task_release()/put_task_struct_rcu_user()). The tasks after cgroup_task_release() and before cgroup_task_free() are subject to race when they may or may not have ->usage count > 0. The race window is between css_task_iter_next() invocations when css_set_lock is released and we may arrive at a new ->task_pos. The iterator should not attempt to resurrect tasks whose ->usage count dropped to zero. (When that happens, __put_task_struct_rcu_cb() is already imminent and the returned task_struct would could be used after free.) As for the fix, we cannot simply check the signal->live count of a task on the dying list because that won't distinguish regular zombies waiting to be reaped from RCU remnant tasks that are going to be free'd. Therefore add an extra check to rule out ->usage==0 tasks from any iteration. The repeat: loop in css_task_iter_advance() doesn't consider ->usage count, so add a new loop to css_task_iter_next() to skip de-used tasks on the dying_list. Rough illustration of the possible race R (reader of cgroup.procs) T (thread) L (group leader) --------------------------------- -------------------------------- -------------------------------- L exits, signal->live > 0 cgroup_task_dead(L) css_set_skip_task_iters() // skips only cset->tasks list_add_tail(&L->cg_list, &cset->dying_tasks) css_task_iter_next() take css_set_lock css_task_iter_advance() leader && signal->live != 0 => it->task_pos = &L->cg_list release css_set_lock T exits --signal->live == 0 cgroup_task_dead(T) // css_set_lock release_task(T) cgroup_task_release(T) release_task(L) // zap_leader cgroup_task_release(L) put_task_struct_rcu_user(L) ...RCU... put_task_struct(L) L->usage = 0 /* L still on dying_tasks */ ...RCU... __put_task_struct(L) css_task_iter_next() // another iteration take css_set_lock it->task_pos = &L->cg_list get_task_struct(L) => addition on 0 drop css_set_lock cgroup_task_free(L) css_set_skip_task_iters() // dying skip comes too late free_task(L) cgroup_procs_show() task_pid_vnr(L)
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.
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Patches and release notes
Recent Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization vulnerabilities
- 8.1 High severity
- 7.1 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 8.1 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.