CVE-2026-63799
Is CVE-2026-63799 real, 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: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: sched/mmcid: Fix OOB clear_bit when CID is MM_CID_UNSET in fixup path In mm_cid_fixup_cpus_to_tasks(), when rq->curr has the target mm and mm_cid.active is set, the CID is checked with cid_in_transit() before setting the transition bit. In per-CPU mode a newly forked or exec'd task can be running with mm_cid.cid == MM_CID_UNSET because CIDs are assigned lazily on schedule-in. With cid_in_transit() the guard passes for MM_CID_UNSET (no transit bit), converts it to MM_CID_UNSET | MM_CID_TRANSIT and stores it back; later mm_cid_schedout() feeds this to clear_bit() with MM_CID_UNSET as the bit number, triggering an out-of-bounds write. Symptoms: this is genuine memory corruption, but a bounded out-of-bounds write, not an arbitrary one. MM_CID_UNSET is the fixed sentinel BIT(31), so once the bad value reaches mm_cid_schedout() the cid_from_transit_cid() strip leaves MM_CID_UNSET, which fails the "cid < max_cids" convergence test and falls into mm_drop_cid() -> clear_bit(MM_CID_UNSET, mm_cidmask(mm)). The cid bitmap is embedded in the mm_struct slab object (after cpu_bitmap and mm_cpus_allowed) and is only num_possible_cpus() bits wide, so clearing bit 31 is a deterministic OOB bit-clear at a fixed offset of 2^31 / 8 == 256 MiB past the bitmap base. The address is not attacker-influenced (fixed sentinel -> fixed offset) and the op only clears a single bit; what sits 256 MiB further along the direct map is whatever kernel object happens to live there, so this corrupts one bit of unpredictable kernel memory -- it is not an arbitrary-address or arbitrary-value write. It triggers only in per-CPU CID mode, when a CPU is running an active task of the target mm whose cid is still MM_CID_UNSET -- the fork()/execve() window before that task's next schedule-in assigns it a real CID -- and a per-CPU -> per-task fixup walks over it (the mode fallback driven by a thread exit, sched_mm_cid_exit(), or by the deferred max_cids recompute in mm_cid_work_fn()). In practice syzkaller surfaced it as a KASAN use-after-free reported in __schedule -> mm_cid_switch_to, where the offending clear_bit() is inlined via mm_cid_schedout() -> mm_drop_cid(). Guard the transition-bit assignment against MM_CID_UNSET, in addition to the existing cid_in_transit() check, so the bit is only set on a genuine task-owned CID. A CPU-owned (MM_CID_ONCPU) CID of a running active task is handled by the cid_on_cpu(pcp->cid) branch above and never reaches this path, so excluding MM_CID_UNSET (and the already-transitioning case) is sufficient.
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-63799)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-63799"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-63799/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-63799"></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 verdictsCurated baseline: A curated baseline from public sources, shown separately from community verdicts.
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.
- 0
This scores high on paper (CVSS 7.8) but the real-world signal is low. It is not in CISA KEV and no public exploit was found, and near-term exploitation looks unlikely (EPSS about 0%). Verify your own exposure before treating it as urgent. It needs local access, so it reads more as a privilege-escalation or post-access risk than a remote one. Not an emergency for most teams, but patch it in your normal cycle and check whether the affected component is actually exposed in your setup.