CVE-2026-98360 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2026-98360
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-2026-98360 Details

Status: Received on 06 Oct 2026, 09:18 UTC

Published on: 06 Oct 2026, 09:18 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2026-98360 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2026-98360: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: RDMA/rxe: insert mcg into mcg_tree only after rxe_mcast_add() succeeds rxe_get_mcg() publishes a newly allocated multicast group in rxe->mcg_tree before programming the backing Ethernet multicast address with rxe_mcast_add(), which runs outside mcg_lock. A local userspace RDMA client reaches this path with ATTACH_MCAST on a UD QP; if rxe_mcast_add() then returns an error (for example -ENODEV when the backing netdev has been removed, or a propagated dev_mc_add() error), the unwind frees the published group without removing it from the tree. A later lookup of the same MGID dereferences the freed struct rxe_mcg from __rxe_lookup_mcg(). Fix this by keeping the new mcg private until rxe_mcast_add() succeeds. Split the tree publication into __rxe_publish_mcg(), call rxe_mcast_add() before taking the tree reference, and free the still-private mcg on failure. Because the group is never visible in mcg_tree until the multicast address is programmed, no concurrent caller can look it up or attach a QP to a group that is about to be torn down, so the error path needs no conditional unwind. If another caller publishes the same MGID while the address is being programmed, the post-add re-check under mcg_lock finds the winner; this caller then drops its private object and balances its own rxe_mcast_add() with rxe_mcast_del() before returning the winner. Reproduced by forcing the rxe_mcast_add() error return under KASAN: without the change the next attach to the same MGID reports a slab-use-after-free in __rxe_lookup_mcg(); with it the forced failure returns cleanly. A no-injection attach/detach regression, including a two-QP shared join/leave and re-attach, stays KASAN- and leak-clean.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2026-98360

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2026-98360 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-2026-98360

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2026-98360.

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-2026-98360, 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-2026-98360, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2026-98360 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2026-98360 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2026-98360 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2026-98360 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2026-98360: 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-2026-84854 – In the WibuKey driver for Windows below Version 6.72, insufficient validation of user input when calculating the size of a kernel buffer could caus...
  • CVE-2026-80327 – An open redirect vulnerability exists in the PingGateway Fragment Filter feature. This issue affects PingGateway versions 7.1.0 and later, 2023.2.0...
  • CVE-2026-98372 – In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xfrm: iptfs: fix stack OOB read in iptfs_skb_reset_frag_walk() iptfs_skb_rese...
  • CVE-2026-98371 – In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xfrm: iptfs: fix runt reassembly panic from short inner tot_len When the star...
  • CVE-2026-98370 – In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xfrm: fix compat ALLOCSPI request use-after-free xfrm_state_netlink() builds ...