Skip to content

CVE-2026-45852

Double Free: is CVE-2026-45852real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Base severity
7.8 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.2%
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 →
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: RDMA/rxe: Fix double free in rxe_srq_from_init In rxe_srq_from_init(), the queue pointer 'q' is assigned to 'srq->rq.queue' before copying the SRQ number to user space. If copy_to_user() fails, the function calls rxe_queue_cleanup() to free the queue, but leaves the now-invalid pointer in 'srq->rq.queue'. The caller of rxe_srq_from_init() (rxe_create_srq) eventually calls rxe_srq_cleanup() upon receiving the error, which triggers a second rxe_queue_cleanup() on the same memory, leading to a double free. The call trace looks like this: kmem_cache_free+0x.../0x... rxe_queue_cleanup+0x1a/0x30 [rdma_rxe] rxe_srq_cleanup+0x42/0x60 [rdma_rxe] rxe_elem_release+0x31/0x70 [rdma_rxe] rxe_create_srq+0x12b/0x1a0 [rdma_rxe] ib_create_srq_user+0x9a/0x150 [ib_core] Fix this by moving 'srq->rq.queue = q' after copy_to_user.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-45852
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45852/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45852)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45852"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45852/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-45852"></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.

    Same weakness: CWE-415 · Double Free.