io_uring/cancel: rearm local work wake up before sleep
Written by anthropic/claude-haiku-5.5 from the sources below. Verify against them.
- Exploited
- No known exploitation
- Fix
- No fix listed
- Who is exposed
- Not reported
- Exploitation?/40Exploitation: unknown (data gap). No CISA SSVC exploitation rating yet
- Exposure?/25Exposure: unknown (data gap). No advisory context yet
- Reach20/20Affects Linux kernel (software on nearly every server, desktop or phone)
- Severity?/10Severity: unknown (data gap). No CVSS score or vendor rating
- No patch5/5No patch listed yet
What would change the score
- Would score about 80 if added to CISA KEV
- Would score about 75 if CISA's SSVC rates exploitation active
- Would score about 47 if advisories confirm default setups are exposed
CVE-2026-99253 is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog. No public exploit code is tracked. It affects Linux; no fixed version is listed yet.
- Last modified
- Where the record stands: published, rejected by its publisher, or superseded by another id.What do these mean? →
- Published
- Whether CISA lists it in its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog: proof that attackers are using it.What do these mean? →
- Not listed in CISA KEV
- A 0-100 score for how much a CVE matters across the industry: exploitation, exposure, how widely the software is used, severity and whether a fix exists.What do these mean? →
- 25/100 · provisional
- Whether working attack code is public (Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or GitHub). Public code makes attacks easier.What do these mean? →
- None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub
Summary
The Linux kernel's io_uring subsystem is affected, specifically its local work cancellation path used during process exec and exit. A race can leave a task asleep with pending io_uring work it cannot run, so it hangs in execve() until an unrelated signal wakes it, or never wakes during exit.
Read the original description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: io_uring/cancel: rearm local work wake up before sleep io_uring_try_cancel_requests() sets ->cq_wait_nr to 1 so that the next io_req_local_work_add() wakes the cancelling task. The add that takes the count to zero is the only one that wakes, later ones see a count <= 0 and return. io_uring_cancel_generic() however only becomes TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE much later, so the one wake up can be spent on a running task. That is fine as long as the entry of that add is still queued, as the io_local_work_pending() check then skips the sleep. It is not if the add was delayed after queueing its entry: CPU0 (submitter in exec or exit) CPU1 (io_req_local_work_add) mpscq_push(req A) io_uring_try_cancel_requests() io_run_local_work() // runs req A io_uring_try_cancel_requests() atomic_set(&ctx->cq_wait_nr, 1) atomic_read(&ctx->cq_wait_nr) == 1 count taken, wake_up_state() // task is running, no-op prepare_to_wait(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE) io_local_work_pending() == false schedule() mpscq_push(req B) cq_wait_nr <= 0, return Only the sleeping task can run req B, so it is stuck in execve() until a signal happens to wake it. An exiting task doesn't even get that. Arm the count again once the task state is set and before the work list is checked, for the rings whose local work this task is the one to run.
Timeline
- CVE published
- First seen by cve.now
- Record last updated
Affected versions
- Linux Linux
Version range not reported
- Linux Linux
7.2
Evidence 2
- Link
- Link
Corrections
None so far.
Something wrong on this page? Report an error. Every fix is listed here.
Questions about CVE-2026-99253
Is CVE-2026-99253 being exploited?
It is not in CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog, and CISA's SSVC assessment does not mark exploitation as active. That does not mean it has not been attacked: vendors and researchers can report attacks before CISA lists them. No public exploit code is tracked.Source: cve.now feed data
Which versions are affected by CVE-2026-99253?
Linux: version 7.2.Source: cve.now feed data