CVE-2026-98104 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2026-98104
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress

Attack Complexity Details

Attack Complexity:
Attack Complexity Analysis In Progress
Attack Vector:
Attack Vector Under Analysis
Privileges Required: None
No authentication is required for exploitation.
Scope:
Impact is confined to the initially vulnerable component.
User Interaction: None
No user interaction is necessary for exploitation.

CVE-2026-98104 Details

Status: Undergoing Analysis

Last updated: 🕙 19 Oct 2026, 10:18 UTC
Originally published on: 🕚 25 Sep 2026, 11:17 UTC

Time between publication and last update: 23 days

CVSS Release:

CVE-2026-98104 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2026-98104: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: cls_u32: fix duplicate handle when node ID pool is exhausted gen_new_kid() falls back to returning max (htid | 0xFFF) when both idr_alloc_u32() ranges are full, instead of reporting an error. u32_change() trusts that value and inserts a new knode with a handle that is already live in the hash table, breaking handle uniqueness within the table's node ID space. The handle was never reserved in ht->handle_idr, so every later error path that does idr_remove(&ht->handle_idr, handle) removes the reservation of a different, live knode, which is then reused — one failed add compounds into further duplicates. The 4095 limit is per (table, bucket) — ht->handle_idr is per hash table and the range is derived from htid (bucketid), so a table with divisor 256 can legitimately hold 256*4095 knodes. The sibling helper gen_new_htid() has the same silent in-band failure: it returns 0 when the tp_c handle pool (1..0x7FF) is full, and u32_init() publishes the root hash table with handle 0 without checking. Two root tables with handle 0 alias in u32_lookup_ht(), allowing cross-tcf_proto knode add/lookup/delete. Add the same exhaustion check that the divisor path already has. Return an error so u32_change() fails with ENOSPC/ENOMEM when the node ID space is exhausted, and so u32_init() fails with -ENOMEM when the hash table ID space is exhausted. The extack message distinguishes pool exhaustion (-ENOSPC) from a transient allocation failure (-ENOMEM). Conditions to recreate the bug: - CONFIG_NET_SCHED=y, CONFIG_CLS_U32=y (or =m with module loaded) - Create a clsact qdisc on a device, then add 4095 u32 filters with auto-generated handles to fill the node ID space for the root hash table (single bucket). The 4096th auto-handle filter add triggers the duplicate handle (fh 800::fff reused). Reachable at Level 2 (unshare -Urn, namespace-local CAP_NET_ADMIN). - For gen_new_htid: create 2047 u32 proto entries on the same block to fill the tp_c handle pool, then create one more. The root table gets handle 0 and aliases with other handle-0 root tables.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2026-98104

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2026-98104 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).

Exploitability Analysis for CVE-2026-98104

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2026-98104.

Understanding AC and PR

A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.

Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.

Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.

CVSS Score Breakdown Chart

Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2026-98104, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.

CIA Impact Analysis

Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2026-98104, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

Confidentiality: None
CVE-2026-98104 does not compromise confidentiality.
Integrity: None
CVE-2026-98104 does not impact data integrity.
Availability: None
CVE-2026-98104 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2026-98104 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2026-98104: Combat Critical CVE Threats

Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.

Other 5 Recently Published CVEs Vulnerabilities

CVE-2026-116123 – A weakness has been identified in NocoDB up to 2026.07.0. The affected element is the function validatePassword of the file /auth/user/signup. Exec...
CVE-2026-116122 – A security flaw has been discovered in NocoDB up to 2026.07.0. Impacted is the function AuthService.validateUser of the component Sign-in Endpoint....
CVE-2026-116121 – A vulnerability was identified in NocoDB up to 2026.08.0. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file users.service.ts of the component ...
CVE-2026-116120 – A vulnerability was determined in NocoDB up to 2026.07.0. This vulnerability affects the function UserRefreshToken.deleteAllUserToken of the file /...
CVE-2026-116119 – A vulnerability was found in NocoDB up to 2026.08.0. This affects an unknown part of the file packages/nocodb/src/services/users/users.service.ts o...