CVE-2026-64400
Is CVE-2026-64400 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:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ksmbd: prevent path traversal bypass by restricting caseless retry ksmbd_vfs_path_lookup() enforces LOOKUP_BENEATH to restrict path resolution within the share root. When a crafted path attempts to escape the share boundary using parent-directory components ('..'), vfs_path_parent_lookup() detects this and immediately fails, returning -EXDEV. However, a bug exists in __ksmbd_vfs_kern_path() under caseless mode. The function fails to intercept the -EXDEV error and erroneously falls through to the caseless retry logic, which is intended only for genuinely missing files. During this retry process, the path is reconstructed, leading to an unintended LOOKUP_BENEATH bypass that allows write-capable users to create zero-length files or directories outside the exported share. Fix this by ensuring that the execution only proceeds to the caseless lookup retry when the error is specifically -ENOENT. Any other errors, such as -EXDEV from a path traversal attempt, must be returned immediately.
References
Published
Embed this verdict
[](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64400)<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64400"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-64400/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-64400"></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 8.6) 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.