Skip to content

CVE-2026-43482

is CVE-2026-43482real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Base severity
5.5 Medium
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.2%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
Not classified
CWE

Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Low signal — verdict needed

Few public signals point to active risk. Whether a scanner hit here is a true or false positive depends on your version and config — community verdicts decide.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →
Affected:Linux

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

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sched_ext: Disable preemption between scx_claim_exit() and kicking helper work scx_claim_exit() atomically sets exit_kind, which prevents scx_error() from triggering further error handling. After claiming exit, the caller must kick the helper kthread work which initiates bypass mode and teardown. If the calling task gets preempted between claiming exit and kicking the helper work, and the BPF scheduler fails to schedule it back (since error handling is now disabled), the helper work is never queued, bypass mode never activates, tasks stop being dispatched, and the system wedges. Disable preemption across scx_claim_exit() and the subsequent work kicking in all callers - scx_disable() and scx_vexit(). Add lockdep_assert_preemption_disabled() to scx_claim_exit() to enforce the requirement.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-43482
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-43482/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-43482)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-43482"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-43482/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-43482"></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?

0 verdicts
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.