Security assessments indicate that CVE-2026-23159 presents a notable risk, potentially requiring prompt mitigation.
Status: Analyzed
Last updated: 🕑 18 Mar 2026, 14:13 UTC
Originally published on: 🕓 14 Feb 2026, 16:15 UTC
Time between publication and last update: 31 days
CVSS Release: version 3
nvd@nist.gov
Primary
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVE-2026-23159: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf: sched: Fix perf crash with new is_user_task() helper In order to do a user space stacktrace the current task needs to be a user task that has executed in user space. It use to be possible to test if a task is a user task or not by simply checking the task_struct mm field. If it was non NULL, it was a user task and if not it was a kernel task. But things have changed over time, and some kernel tasks now have their own mm field. An idea was made to instead test PF_KTHREAD and two functions were used to wrap this check in case it became more complex to test if a task was a user task or not[1]. But this was rejected and the C code simply checked the PF_KTHREAD directly. It was later found that not all kernel threads set PF_KTHREAD. The io-uring helpers instead set PF_USER_WORKER and this needed to be added as well. But checking the flags is still not enough. There's a very small window when a task exits that it frees its mm field and it is set back to NULL. If perf were to trigger at this moment, the flags test would say its a user space task but when perf would read the mm field it would crash with at NULL pointer dereference. Now there are flags that can be used to test if a task is exiting, but they are set in areas that perf may still want to profile the user space task (to see where it exited). The only real test is to check both the flags and the mm field. Instead of making this modification in every location, create a new is_user_task() helper function that does all the tests needed to know if it is safe to read the user space memory or not. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250425204120.639530125@goodmis.org/
The exploitability of CVE-2026-23159 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).
CVE-2026-23159 presents an accessible attack vector with minimal effort required. Restricting access controls and implementing security updates are critical to reducing exploitation risks.
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.
Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2026-23159, 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.
Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2026-23159, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.
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.