Skip to content

CVE-2026-53085

Is CVE-2026-53085 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
7.8 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.1%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-825
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 →

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: bpf: fix mm lifecycle in open-coded task_vma iterator The open-coded task_vma iterator reads task->mm locklessly and acquires mmap_read_trylock() but never calls mmget(). If the task exits concurrently, the mm_struct can be freed as it is not SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU, resulting in a use-after-free. Safely read task->mm with a trylock on alloc_lock and acquire an mm reference. Drop the reference via bpf_iter_mmput_async() in _destroy() and error paths. bpf_iter_mmput_async() is a local wrapper around mmput_async() with a fallback to mmput() on !CONFIG_MMU. Reject irqs-disabled contexts (including NMI) up front. Operations used by _next() and _destroy() (mmap_read_unlock, bpf_iter_mmput_async) take spinlocks with IRQs disabled (pool->lock, pi_lock). Running from NMI or from a tracepoint that fires with those locks held could deadlock. A trylock on alloc_lock is used instead of the blocking task_lock() (get_task_mm) to avoid a deadlock when a softirq BPF program iterates a task that already holds its alloc_lock on the same CPU.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-53085
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-53085/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-53085)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-53085"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-53085/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-53085"></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-825.