CVE-2026-64137
Is CVE-2026-64137 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: smb: client: require net admin for CIFS SWN netlink CIFS_GENL_CMD_SWN_NOTIFY is the userspace witness-notify command. The intended sender is the cifs.witness helper, but the generic-netlink operation currently has no capability flag, so any local process can send RESOURCE_CHANGE or CLIENT_MOVE notifications to the in-kernel witness handler. The same family exposes CIFS_GENL_MCGRP_SWN without multicast-group capability flags. Register messages sent to that group include the witness registration id and, for NTLM-authenticated mounts, the username, domain, and password attributes copied from the CIFS session. An unprivileged local process should not be able to join that group and receive those messages. Require CAP_NET_ADMIN for incoming SWN_NOTIFY commands with GENL_ADMIN_PERM, and require CAP_NET_ADMIN over the network namespace for joining the SWN multicast group with GENL_MCAST_CAP_NET_ADMIN. The cifs.witness service runs with the privileges needed for both operations.
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64137)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64137"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64137/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-64137"></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.