As a catastrophic security flaw, CVE-2026-31444 has severe implications, demanding immediate intervention.
Status: Analyzed
Last updated: 🕖 07 May 2026, 19:26 UTC
Originally published on: 🕑 22 Apr 2026, 14:16 UTC
Time between publication and last update: 15 days
CVSS Release: version 3
416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
Secondary
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVE-2026-31444: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ksmbd: fix use-after-free and NULL deref in smb_grant_oplock() smb_grant_oplock() has two issues in the oplock publication sequence: 1) opinfo is linked into ci->m_op_list (via opinfo_add) before add_lease_global_list() is called. If add_lease_global_list() fails (kmalloc returns NULL), the error path frees the opinfo via __free_opinfo() while it is still linked in ci->m_op_list. Concurrent m_op_list readers (opinfo_get_list, or direct iteration in smb_break_all_levII_oplock) dereference the freed node. 2) opinfo->o_fp is assigned after add_lease_global_list() publishes the opinfo on the global lease list. A concurrent find_same_lease_key() can walk the lease list and dereference opinfo->o_fp->f_ci while o_fp is still NULL. Fix by restructuring the publication sequence to eliminate post-publish failure: - Set opinfo->o_fp before any list publication (fixes NULL deref). - Preallocate lease_table via alloc_lease_table() before opinfo_add() so add_lease_global_list() becomes infallible after publication. - Keep the original m_op_list publication order (opinfo_add before lease list) so concurrent opens via same_client_has_lease() and opinfo_get_list() still see the in-flight grant. - Use opinfo_put() instead of __free_opinfo() on err_out so that the RCU-deferred free path is used. This also requires splitting add_lease_global_list() to take a preallocated lease_table and changing its return type from int to void, since it can no longer fail.
The exploitability of CVE-2026-31444 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).
With low attack complexity and no required privileges, CVE-2026-31444 is an easy target for cybercriminals. Organizations should prioritize immediate mitigation measures to prevent unauthorized access and data breaches.
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-2026-31444, 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-2026-31444, 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.