Skip to content

CVE-2026-46256

Is CVE-2026-46256 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-667
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: NFS/localio: prevent direct reclaim recursion into NFS via nfs_writepages LOCALIO is an NFS loopback mount optimization that avoids using the network for READ, WRITE and COMMIT if the NFS client and server are determined to be on the same system. But because LOCALIO is still fundamentally "just NFS loopback mount" it is susceptible to recursion deadlock via direct reclaim, e.g.: NFS LOCALIO down to XFS and then back into NFS via nfs_writepages. Fix LOCALIO's potential for direct reclaim deadlock by ensuring that all its page cache allocations are done from GFP_NOFS context. Thanks to Ben Coddington for pointing out commit ad22c7a043c2 ("xfs: prevent stack overflows from page cache allocation").

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-46256
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46256/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46256)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46256"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46256/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-46256"></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: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.

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

    No confirmed in-the-wild exploitation or public exploit was found for this yet.

Add a field note or remediationoptional
Note type

What are you adding?

Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

Same weakness: CWE-667.