CVE-2026-64030
Is CVE-2026-64030 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:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: wifi: mac80211: bounds-check link_id in ieee80211_ml_epcs IEEE80211_MLE_STA_EPCS_CONTROL_LINK_ID is 0x000f, so link_id extracted from a PRIO_ACCESS ML element PER_STA_PROFILE subelement can be 0..15. sdata->link[] has IEEE80211_MLD_MAX_NUM_LINKS (15) entries (indices 0..14), making index 15 out-of-bounds. A connected WiFi 7 AP can trigger this by sending an EPCS Enable Response action frame with a PER_STA_PROFILE subelement where link_id = 15. The unsolicited-notification path (dialog_token = 0) is reachable any time EPCS is already enabled, without any prior client request. sdata->link[15] reads into the first word of sdata->activate_links_work (a wiphy_work whose embedded list_head is non-NULL after INIT_LIST_HEAD), so the NULL check on the result does not catch the invalid access. The garbage pointer is then passed to ieee80211_sta_wmm_params(), which dereferences link->sdata and crashes the kernel. The same class of bug was fixed for ieee80211_ml_reconfiguration() by commit 162d331d833d ("wifi: mac80211: bounds-check link_id in ieee80211_ml_reconfiguration").
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64030)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64030"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64030/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-64030"></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 8.8) 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. 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.