Skip to content

CVE-2026-64141

Is CVE-2026-64141 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
7.5 High
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.2%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
Not classified
CWE

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:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ksmbd: fix null pointer dereference in compare_guid_key() session_fd_check() walks the per-inode m_op_list during durable-handle session teardown and sets op->conn = NULL for every opinfo whose conn matched the closing session's connection. The matching opinfo, however, stays linked in its per-ClientGuid lease_table_list entry's lb->lease_list because destroy_lease_table() only runs on full TCP-connection teardown, not on SESSION_LOGOFF. If the same TCP connection then negotiates a fresh session with the same ClientGuid (ClientGuid is bound to NEGOTIATE, not the session, and is unchanged across LOGOFF + SETUP) and issues a SMB2 CREATE with a lease context on a different inode, find_same_lease_key() walks lb->lease_list, reaches the stale opinfo, and calls compare_guid_key(), which unconditionally dereferences opinfo->conn->ClientGUID. The conn pointer is NULL and the kernel panics. Reproducer requires only a successful SMB2 SESSION_SETUP and a share configured with 'durable handles = yes'. KASAN report on mainline 70390501d194: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address 0xdffffc0000000069: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x0000000000000348-0x000000000000034f] Workqueue: ksmbd-io handle_ksmbd_work RIP: 0010:bcmp+0x5b/0x230 Call Trace: compare_guid_key+0x4b/0xd0 find_same_lease_key+0x324/0x690 smb2_open+0x6aea/0x8e60 handle_ksmbd_work+0x796/0xee0 ... Faulting address 0x348 is the offset of ClientGUID within struct ksmbd_conn, confirming opinfo->conn was NULL. Read opinfo->conn once and bail out if it has been cleared by a concurrent session_fd_check(). A half-detached opinfo cannot be the owner of an active lease, so returning 0 is the correct match result.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-64141
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64141/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64141)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64141"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64141/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-64141"></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 verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

Curated 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
    Field note · TruePositive EditorialCurated

    This scores high on paper (CVSS 7.5) 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 is reachable over the network with no authentication and no user interaction, which is the most dangerous profile. 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.

Add a field note or remediationoptional
Note type

What are you adding?

Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.