CVE-2026-53256
is CVE-2026-53256real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.
signals
public sources
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:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: Bluetooth: RFCOMM: hold listener socket in rfcomm_connect_ind() rfcomm_get_sock_by_channel() scans rfcomm_sk_list under the list lock, but returns the selected listener after dropping that lock without taking a reference. rfcomm_connect_ind() then locks the listener, queues a child socket on it, and may notify it after unlocking it. The buggy scenario involves two paths, with each column showing the order within that path: rfcomm_connect_ind(): listener close: 1. Find parent in 1. close() enters rfcomm_get_sock_by_channel() rfcomm_sock_release(). 2. Drop rfcomm_sk_list.lock 2. rfcomm_sock_shutdown() without pinning parent. closes the listener. 3. Call lock_sock(parent) and 3. rfcomm_sock_kill() bt_accept_enqueue(parent, unlinks and puts parent. sk, true). 4. Read parent flags and may 4. parent can be freed. call sk_state_change(). If close wins the race, parent can be freed before rfcomm_connect_ind() reaches lock_sock(), bt_accept_enqueue(), or the deferred-setup callback. Take a reference on the listener before leaving rfcomm_sk_list.lock. After lock_sock() succeeds, recheck that it is still in BT_LISTEN before queueing a child, cache the deferred-setup bit while the parent is locked, and drop the reference after the last parent use. KASAN reported a slab-use-after-free in lock_sock_nested() from rfcomm_connect_ind(), with the freeing stack going through rfcomm_sock_kill() and rfcomm_sock_release().
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-53256)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-53256"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-53256/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-53256"></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 verdictsNo 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.