Skip to content

CVE-2026-43011

Double Free: Is CVE-2026-43011 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
9.8 Critical
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.6%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-415 · Double Free
CWE

High CVSS base score, but low real-world exploitation probability (EPSS). Likely less urgent than the score implies.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Real, but low real-world risk

A genuine vulnerability on paper, but EPSS shows little real-world exploitation — the base score may overstate urgency. This is not the same as a false positive.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/x25: Fix potential double free of skb When alloc_skb fails in x25_queue_rx_frame it calls kfree_skb(skb) at line 48 and returns 1 (error). This error propagates back through the call chain: x25_queue_rx_frame returns 1 | v x25_state3_machine receives the return value 1 and takes the else branch at line 278, setting queued=0 and returning 0 | v x25_process_rx_frame returns queued=0 | v x25_backlog_rcv at line 452 sees queued=0 and calls kfree_skb(skb) again This would free the same skb twice. Looking at x25_backlog_rcv: net/x25/x25_in.c:x25_backlog_rcv() { ... queued = x25_process_rx_frame(sk, skb); ... if (!queued) kfree_skb(skb); }

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-43011
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-43011/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-43011)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-43011"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-43011/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-43011"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.

    Add a field note or remediationoptional
    Note type

    What are you adding?

    Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

    Same weakness: CWE-415 · Double Free.