Skip to content

CVE-2026-45870

Is CVE-2026-45870 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.
0.2%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-401
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: SUNRPC: auth_gss: fix memory leaks in XDR decoding error paths The gssx_dec_ctx(), gssx_dec_status(), and gssx_dec_name() functions allocate memory via gssx_dec_buffer(), which calls kmemdup(). When a subsequent decode operation fails, these functions return immediately without freeing previously allocated buffers, causing memory leaks. The leak in gssx_dec_ctx() is particularly relevant because the caller (gssp_accept_sec_context_upcall) initializes several buffer length fields to non-zero values, resulting in memory allocation: struct gssx_ctx rctxh = { .exported_context_token.len = GSSX_max_output_handle_sz, .mech.len = GSS_OID_MAX_LEN, .src_name.display_name.len = GSSX_max_princ_sz, .targ_name.display_name.len = GSSX_max_princ_sz }; If, for example, gssx_dec_name() succeeds for src_name but fails for targ_name, the memory allocated for exported_context_token, mech, and src_name.display_name remains unreferenced and cannot be reclaimed. Add error handling with goto-based cleanup to free any previously allocated buffers before returning an error.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-45870
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45870/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45870)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45870"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45870/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-45870"></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-401.