Skip to content

CVE-2026-52952

Is CVE-2026-52952 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
8.8 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.1%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-617
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

Officially disputed

The CVE record itself is disputed or rejected upstream — a strong candidate for a false positive in scanners. Confirm with a verdict.

Based on NVD record status

Confirm or dispute →

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: iommu: Fix WARN_ON in __iommu_group_set_domain_nofail() due to reset In __iommu_group_set_domain_internal(), concurrent domain attachments are rejected when any device in the group is recovering. This is necessary to fence concurrent attachments to a multi-device group where devices might share the same RID due to PCI DMA alias quirks, but triggers the WARN_ON in __iommu_group_set_domain_nofail(). Other IOMMU_SET_DOMAIN_MUST_SUCCEED callers in detach/teardown paths, such as __iommu_group_set_core_domain and __iommu_release_dma_ownership, should not be rejected, as the domain would be freed anyway in these nofail paths while group->domain is still pointing to it. So pci_dev_reset_iommu_done() could trigger a UAF when re-attaching group->domain. Honor the IOMMU_SET_DOMAIN_MUST_SUCCEED flag, allowing the callers through the group->recovery_cnt fence, so as to update the group->domain pointer. Instead add a gdev->blocked check in the device iteration loop, to prevent any concurrent per-device detachment.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-52952
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-52952/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-52952)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-52952"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-52952/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-52952"></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-617.