Skip to content

CVE-2026-53142

Is CVE-2026-53142 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

☆ Watch

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-908
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: drm/xe/display: fix oops in suspend/shutdown without display The xe driver keeps track of whether to probe display, and whether display hardware is there, using xe->info.probe_display. It gets set to false if there's no display after intel_display_device_probe(). However, the display may also be disabled via fuses, detected at a later time in intel_display_device_info_runtime_init(). In this case, the xe driver does for_each_intel_crtc() on uninitialized mode config in xe_display_flush_cleanup_work(), leading to a NULL pointer dereference, and generally calls display code with display info cleared. Check for intel_display_device_present() after intel_display_device_info_runtime_init(), and reset xe->info.probe_display as necessary. Also do unset_display_features() for completeness, although display runtime init has already done that. This will need to be unified across all cases later. Move intel_display_device_info_runtime_init() call slightly earlier, similar to i915, to avoid a bunch of unnecessary setup for no display cases. Note #1: The xe driver has no business doing low level display plumbing like for_each_intel_crtc() to begin with. It all needs to happen in display code. Note #2: The actual bug is present already in commit 44e694958b95 ("drm/xe/display: Implement display support"), but the oops was likely introduced later at commit ddf6492e0e50 ("drm/xe/display: Make display suspend/resume work on discrete"). (cherry picked from commit 7c3eb9f47533220888a67266448185fd0775d4da)

References

NVD MITRE CVE.org

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-53142
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-53142/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-53142)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-53142"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-53142/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-53142"></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.

    Related CVEs

    Same weakness: CWE-908.