Skip to content

CVE-2026-46300

Out-of-bounds Write: is CVE-2026-46300real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
Exploit-DB +1
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
7.8 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
4%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-787 · Out-of-bounds Write
CWE

High CVSS base score, but low real-world exploitation probability (EPSS). Likely less urgent than the score implies.

public exploits

links to sources — we don’t host code

A working exploit is publicly available from a maintained source. Treat this as higher urgency and verify your exposure.

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: net: skbuff: preserve shared-frag marker during coalescing skb_try_coalesce() can attach paged frags from @from to @to. If @from has SKBFL_SHARED_FRAG set, the resulting @to skb can contain the same externally-owned or page-cache-backed frags, but the shared-frag marker is currently lost. That breaks the invariant relied on by later in-place writers. In particular, ESP input checks skb_has_shared_frag() before deciding whether an uncloned nonlinear skb can skip skb_cow_data(). If TCP receive coalescing has moved shared frags into an unmarked skb, ESP can see skb_has_shared_frag() as false and decrypt in place over page-cache backed frags. Propagate SKBFL_SHARED_FRAG when skb_try_coalesce() transfers paged frags. The tailroom copy path does not need the marker because it copies bytes into @to's linear data rather than transferring frag descriptors.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-46300
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46300/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46300)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46300"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-46300/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-46300"></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-787 · Out-of-bounds Write.