Skip to content

CVE-2026-46268

Is CVE-2026-46268 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
Not classified
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: PCI/P2PDMA: Fix p2pmem_alloc_mmap() warning condition Commit b7e282378773 has already changed the initial page refcount of p2pdma page from one to zero, however, in p2pmem_alloc_mmap() it uses "VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_PAGE(!page_ref_count(page))" to assert the initial page refcount should not be zero and the following will be reported when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is enabled: page: refcount:0 mapcount:0 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x0 pfn:0x380400000 flags: 0x20000000002000(reserved|node=0|zone=4) raw: 0020000000002000 ff1100015e3ab440 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 raw: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000000 page dumped because: VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_PAGE(!page_ref_count(page)) ------------[ cut here ]------------ WARNING: CPU: 5 PID: 449 at drivers/pci/p2pdma.c:240 p2pmem_alloc_mmap+0x83a/0xa60 Fix by using "page_ref_count(page)" as the assertion condition.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-46268
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46268/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46268)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46268"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46268/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-46268"></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.