CVE-2026-99202 Vulnerability Analysis & Exploit Details

CVE-2026-99202
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-2026-99202 Details

Status: Received on 28 Oct 2026, 11:17 UTC

Published on: 28 Oct 2026, 11:17 UTC

CVSS Release:

CVE-2026-99202 Vulnerability Summary

CVE-2026-99202: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: libsas: Fix SMP IO deadlock during HA resume smp_execute_task_sg() calls pm_runtime_get_sync() on the host before issuing an SMP command. When that command is itself issued from the HA resume path, the get_sync() deadlocks: it waits for the ongoing resume (the device is RPM_RESUMING), while the resume is blocked in sas_drain_work() waiting for that same SMP IO to complete. The deadlock needs an expander-attached SATA disk. During sas_resume_ha() -> sas_drain_work(), DISCE_RESUME -> sas_resume_sata() -> ata_sas_port_resume() requests ATA_EH_RESET, and the hard reset for such a disk is done via SMP PHY CONTROL (sas_ata_hard_reset() -> sas_phy_reset() -> sas_smp_phy_control() -> smp_execute_task_sg()). Direct-attached SATA resets through lldd_control_phy() and SSP devices use TMFs, so neither hits this. Replace the get_sync()/put_sync() pair with pm_runtime_get_noresume()/pm_runtime_put(). smp_execute_task_sg() only needs to hold off autosuspend while the SMP is in flight, and it must not try to resume the host: a sync resume issued from the HA resume path itself is what deadlocks, and by the time sas_resume_ha() runs, hw_init has already reinitialized the hardware, so the device is accessible without one. The usage reference is still required. Discovery work normally runs inside an event worker's PM reference, taken at sas_notify_port_event() notify time and held until the handler has flushed the disco queue. sas_rediscover_ex_phy() however requeues DISCE_REVALIDATE_DOMAIN from within the revalidation worker itself, and flush_workqueue() does not wait for work items queued during execution, so that chained revalidation runs with no outer PM reference - without the get_noresume(), its SMP could race autosuspend. For the BSG path, sas_smp_handler() is the only caller which may find the host autosuspended: expander SMP requests do not go through any SCSI device request queue, so nothing else in that path holds the host awake. Resume it there with pm_runtime_resume_and_get() and check the result.

Assessing the Risk of CVE-2026-99202

Access Complexity Graph

The exploitability of CVE-2026-99202 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-2026-99202

No exploitability data is available for CVE-2026-99202.

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-2026-99202, 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-2026-99202, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.

  • Confidentiality: None
    CVE-2026-99202 does not compromise confidentiality.
  • Integrity: None
    CVE-2026-99202 does not impact data integrity.
  • Availability: None
    CVE-2026-99202 does not affect system availability.

CVE-2026-99202 References

External References

CWE Common Weakness Enumeration

Unknown

Protect Your Infrastructure against CVE-2026-99202: 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-2026-93516 – A use-after-free caused by lack of lifecycle management when adding / removing XInput master devices in X.org X Server before 21.1.25 and XWayland ...
  • CVE-2026-93515 – A use-after-free in present_clear_window_notifies() in the X.org X Server before 21.1.25 and X Wayland before 24.1.14 could be used by malicious X...
  • CVE-2026-67080 – HCL BigFix AEX is affected by an Information Disclosure vulnerability due to improper handling of errors or exceptional conditions. This could allo...
  • CVE-2026-67079 – HCL BigFix AEX is affected by a Clickjacking vulnerability, which could allow an attacker to embed the application within a malicious web page or i...
  • CVE-2026-67077 – HCL BigFix AEX is affected by a Server-Side Request Forgery vulnerability, which could allow an attacker to cause the application to send unauthori...