Skip to content

CVE-2026-45845

NULL Pointer Dereference: Is CVE-2026-45845 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
5.5 Medium
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.1%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-476 · NULL Pointer Dereference
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 →

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: net/sched: taprio: fix NULL pointer dereference in class dump When a TAPRIO child qdisc is deleted via RTM_DELQDISC, taprio_graft() is called with new == NULL and stores NULL into q->qdiscs[cl - 1]. Subsequent RTM_GETTCLASS dump operations walk all classes via taprio_walk() and call taprio_dump_class(), which calls taprio_leaf() returning the NULL pointer, then dereferences it to read child->handle, causing a kernel NULL pointer dereference. The bug is reachable with namespace-scoped CAP_NET_ADMIN on any kernel with CONFIG_NET_SCH_TAPRIO enabled. On systems with unprivileged user namespaces enabled, an unprivileged local user can trigger a kernel panic by creating a taprio qdisc inside a new network namespace, grafting an explicit child qdisc, deleting it, and requesting a class dump. The RTM_GETTCLASS dump itself requires no capability. Oops: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0xdffffc0000000007: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN NOPTI KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000038-0x000000000000003f] RIP: 0010:taprio_dump_class (net/sched/sch_taprio.c:2478) Call Trace: <TASK> tc_fill_tclass (net/sched/sch_api.c:1966) qdisc_class_dump (net/sched/sch_api.c:2326) taprio_walk (net/sched/sch_taprio.c:2514) tc_dump_tclass_qdisc (net/sched/sch_api.c:2352) tc_dump_tclass_root (net/sched/sch_api.c:2370) tc_dump_tclass (net/sched/sch_api.c:2431) rtnl_dumpit (net/core/rtnetlink.c:6864) netlink_dump (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2325) rtnetlink_rcv_msg (net/core/rtnetlink.c:6959) netlink_rcv_skb (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2550) </TASK> Fix this by substituting &noop_qdisc when new is NULL in taprio_graft(), a common pattern used by other qdiscs (e.g., multiq_graft()) to ensure the q->qdiscs[] slots are never NULL. This makes control-plane dump paths safe without requiring individual NULL checks. Since the data-plane paths (taprio_enqueue and taprio_dequeue_from_txq) previously had explicit NULL guards that would drop/skip the packet cleanly, update those checks to test for &noop_qdisc instead. Without this, packets would reach taprio_enqueue_one() which increments the root qdisc's qlen and backlog before calling the child's enqueue; noop_qdisc drops the packet but those counters are never rolled back, permanently inflating the root qdisc's statistics. After this change *old can be a valid qdisc, NULL, or &noop_qdisc. Only call qdisc_put(*old) in the first case to avoid decreasing noop_qdisc's refcount, which was never increased.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-45845
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45845/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45845)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45845"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45845/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-45845"></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-476 · NULL Pointer Dereference.