CVE-2026-23333
Vulnerability Scoring
Status: Awaiting Analysis
Last updated: 🕓 03 Apr 2026, 16:16 UTC
Originally published on: 🕚 25 Mar 2026, 11:16 UTC
Time between publication and last update: 9 days
CVSS Release:
CVE-2026-23333: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfilter: nft_set_rbtree: validate open interval overlap Open intervals do not have an end element, in particular an open interval at the end of the set is hard to validate because of it is lacking the end element, and interval validation relies on such end element to perform the checks. This patch adds a new flag field to struct nft_set_elem, this is not an issue because this is a temporary object that is allocated in the stack from the insert/deactivate path. This flag field is used to specify that this is the last element in this add/delete command. The last flag is used, in combination with the start element cookie, to check if there is a partial overlap, eg. Already exists: 255.255.255.0-255.255.255.254 Add interval: 255.255.255.0-255.255.255.255 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ start element overlap Basically, the idea is to check for an existing end element in the set if there is an overlap with an existing start element. However, the last open interval can come in any position in the add command, the corner case can get a bit more complicated: Already exists: 255.255.255.0-255.255.255.254 Add intervals: 255.255.255.0-255.255.255.255,255.255.255.0-255.255.255.254 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ start element overlap To catch this overlap, annotate that the new start element is a possible overlap, then report the overlap if the next element is another start element that confirms that previous element in an open interval at the end of the set. For deletions, do not update the start cookie when deleting an open interval, otherwise this can trigger spurious EEXIST when adding new elements. Unfortunately, there is no NFT_SET_ELEM_INTERVAL_OPEN flag which would make easier to detect open interval overlaps.
The exploitability of CVE-2026-23333 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).
No exploitability data is available for CVE-2026-23333.
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-2026-23333, 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-2026-23333, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.
Unknown
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.