Skip to content

CVE-2026-46099

is CVE-2026-46099real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Base severity
8.1 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.4%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
Not classified
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:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: ipv6: fix NOREF dst use in seg6 and rpl lwtunnels seg6_input_core() and rpl_input() call ip6_route_input() which sets a NOREF dst on the skb, then pass it to dst_cache_set_ip6() invoking dst_hold() unconditionally. On PREEMPT_RT, ksoftirqd is preemptible and a higher-priority task can release the underlying pcpu_rt between the lookup and the caching through a concurrent FIB lookup on a shared nexthop. Simplified race sequence: ksoftirqd/X higher-prio task (same CPU X) ----------- -------------------------------- seg6_input_core(,skb)/rpl_input(skb) dst_cache_get() -> miss ip6_route_input(skb) -> ip6_pol_route(,skb,flags) [RT6_LOOKUP_F_DST_NOREF in flags] -> FIB lookup resolves fib6_nh [nhid=N route] -> rt6_make_pcpu_route() [creates pcpu_rt, refcount=1] pcpu_rt->sernum = fib6_sernum [fib6_sernum=W] -> cmpxchg(fib6_nh.rt6i_pcpu, NULL, pcpu_rt) [slot was empty, store succeeds] -> skb_dst_set_noref(skb, dst) [dst is pcpu_rt, refcount still 1] rt_genid_bump_ipv6() -> bumps fib6_sernum [fib6_sernum from W to Z] ip6_route_output() -> ip6_pol_route() -> FIB lookup resolves fib6_nh [nhid=N] -> rt6_get_pcpu_route() pcpu_rt->sernum != fib6_sernum [W <> Z, stale] -> prev = xchg(rt6i_pcpu, NULL) -> dst_release(prev) [prev is pcpu_rt, refcount 1->0, dead] dst = skb_dst(skb) [dst is the dead pcpu_rt] dst_cache_set_ip6(dst) -> dst_hold() on dead dst -> WARN / use-after-free For the race to occur, ksoftirqd must be preemptible (PREEMPT_RT without PREEMPT_RT_NEEDS_BH_LOCK) and a concurrent task must be able to release the pcpu_rt. Shared nexthop objects provide such a path, as two routes pointing to the same nhid share the same fib6_nh and its rt6i_pcpu entry. Fix seg6_input_core() and rpl_input() by calling skb_dst_force() after ip6_route_input() to force the NOREF dst into a refcounted one before caching. The output path is not affected as ip6_route_output() already returns a refcounted dst.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-46099
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46099/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46099)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46099"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46099/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-46099"></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.