CVE-2026-23316 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2026-23316
Vulnerability Scoring

Analysis In Progress
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-2026-23316 Details

Status: Awaiting Analysis

Published on: 25 Mar 2026, 11:16 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2026-23316 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2026-23316: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: ipv4: fix ARM64 alignment fault in multipath hash seed `struct sysctl_fib_multipath_hash_seed` contains two u32 fields (user_seed and mp_seed), making it an 8-byte structure with a 4-byte alignment requirement. In `fib_multipath_hash_from_keys()`, the code evaluates the entire struct atomically via `READ_ONCE()`: mp_seed = READ_ONCE(net->ipv4.sysctl_fib_multipath_hash_seed).mp_seed; While this silently works on GCC by falling back to unaligned regular loads which the ARM64 kernel tolerates, it causes a fatal kernel panic when compiled with Clang and LTO enabled. Commit e35123d83ee3 ("arm64: lto: Strengthen READ_ONCE() to acquire when CONFIG_LTO=y") strengthens `READ_ONCE()` to use Load-Acquire instructions (`ldar` / `ldapr`) to prevent compiler reordering bugs under Clang LTO. Since the macro evaluates the full 8-byte struct, Clang emits a 64-bit `ldar` instruction. ARM64 architecture strictly requires `ldar` to be naturally aligned, thus executing it on a 4-byte aligned address triggers a strict Alignment Fault (FSC = 0x21). Fix the read side by moving the `READ_ONCE()` directly to the `u32` member, which emits a safe 32-bit `ldar Wn`. Furthermore, Eric Dumazet pointed out that `WRITE_ONCE()` on the entire struct in `proc_fib_multipath_hash_set_seed()` is also flawed. Analysis shows that Clang splits this 8-byte write into two separate 32-bit `str` instructions. While this avoids an alignment fault, it destroys atomicity and exposes a tear-write vulnerability. Fix this by explicitly splitting the write into two 32-bit `WRITE_ONCE()` operations. Finally, add the missing `READ_ONCE()` when reading `user_seed` in `proc_fib_multipath_hash_seed()` to ensure proper pairing and concurrency safety.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2026-23316

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2026-23316 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-2026-23316

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2026-23316.

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-2026-23316, 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-2026-23316, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2026-23316 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2026-23316 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2026-23316 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2026-23316 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2026-23316: 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-2026-40688 – A out-of-bounds write vulnerability in Fortinet FortiWeb 8.0.0 through 8.0.3, FortiWeb 7.6.0 through 7.6.6, FortiWeb 7.4.0 through 7.4.11 may allow...
  • CVE-2026-39399 – NuGet Gallery is a package repository that powers nuget.org. A security vulnerability exists in the NuGetGallery backend job’s handling of .nuspec ...
  • CVE-2026-39387 – BoidCMS is an open-source, PHP-based flat-file CMS for building simple websites and blogs, using JSON as its database. Versions prior to 2.1.3 are ...
  • CVE-2026-35589 – nanobot is a personal AI assistant. Versions prior to 0.1.5 contain a Cross-Site WebSocket Hijacking (CSWSH) vulnerability exists in the bridge's W...
  • CVE-2026-35034 – Jellyfin is an open source self hosted media server. Versions prior to 10.11.7 contain a denial of service vulnerability in the SyncPlay group crea...