CVE-2026-64095
Is CVE-2026-64095 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:N/I:L/A:H
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: batman-adv: bla: avoid double decrement of bla.num_requests The bla.num_requests is increased when no request_sent was in progress. And it is decremented in various places (announcement was received, backbone is purged, periodic work). But the check if the request_sent is actually set to a specific state and the atomic_dec/_inc are not safe because they are not atomic (TOCTOU) and multiple such code portions can run concurrently. At the same time, it is necessary to modify request_sent (state) and bla.num_requests atomically. Otherwise batadv_bla_send_request() might set request_sent to 1 and is interrupted. batadv_handle_announce() can then set request_sent back to 0 and decrement num_requests before batadv_bla_send_request() incremented it. The two operations must therefore be locked. And since state (request_sent) and wait_periods are only accessed inside this lock, they can be converted to simpler datatypes. And to avoid that the bla.num_requests is touched by a parallel running context with a valid backbone_gw reference after batadv_bla_purge_backbone_gw() ran, a third state "stopped" is required to correctly signal that a backbone_gw is in the state of being cleaned up.
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64095)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64095"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64095/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-64095"></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 7.1) 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.