Skip to content

CVE-2026-43500

Out-of-bounds Write: Is CVE-2026-43500 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
Metasploit +2
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
7.8 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
93%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-787 · Out-of-bounds Write
CWE

High severity and high exploitation probability. Prioritise remediation.

public exploits

links to sources — we don’t host code

A working exploit is publicly available from a maintained source. Treat this as higher urgency and verify your exposure.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Likely real & worth prioritising

High base severity and a high real-world exploitation probability both point to a genuine, actively targeted issue.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →
Affected:Linux

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

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: rxrpc: Also unshare DATA/RESPONSE packets when paged frags are present The DATA-packet handler in rxrpc_input_call_event() and the RESPONSE handler in rxrpc_verify_response() copy the skb to a linear one before calling into the security ops only when skb_cloned() is true. An skb that is not cloned but still carries externally-owned paged fragments (e.g. SKBFL_SHARED_FRAG set by splice() into a UDP socket via __ip_append_data, or a chained skb_has_frag_list()) falls through to the in-place decryption path, which binds the frag pages directly into the AEAD/skcipher SGL via skb_to_sgvec(). Extend the gate to also unshare when skb_has_frag_list() or skb_has_shared_frag() is true. This catches the splice-loopback vector and other externally-shared frag sources while preserving the zero-copy fast path for skbs whose frags are kernel-private (e.g. NIC page_pool RX, GRO). The OOM/trace handling already in place is reused.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-43500
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-43500/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-43500)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-43500"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-43500/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-43500"></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

Curated baseline: TruePositive's read from public sources is Real & exploitable — a starting point, not a community verdict.

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.

  • 0
    Field note · TruePositive EditorialCurated

    There is a Metasploit module for this, so exploitation is easy and reliable even without deep skill. Treat it as exploitable. FIRST EPSS estimates about a 93% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days, which is high relative to most CVEs. It needs local access, so it reads more as a privilege-escalation or post-access risk than a remote one. Patch this on priority and confirm the fix holds.

Add a field note or remediationoptional
Note type

What are you adding?

Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

Same weakness: CWE-787 · Out-of-bounds Write.