Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2026-23103
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipvlan: Make the addrs_lock be per port Make the addrs_lock be per port, not per ipvlan dev. Initial code seems to be written in the assumption, that any address change must occur under RTNL. But it is not so for the case of IPv6. So 1) Introduce per-port addrs_lock. 2) It was needed to fix places where it was forgotten to take lock (ipvlan_open/ipvlan_close) This appears to be a very minor problem though. Since it's highly unlikely that ipvlan_add_addr() will be called on 2 CPU simultaneously. But nevertheless, this could cause: 1) False-negative of ipvlan_addr_busy(): one interface iterated through all port->ipvlans + ipvlan->addrs under some ipvlan spinlock, and another added IP under its own lock. Though this is only possible for IPv6, since looks like only ipvlan_addr6_event() can be called without rtnl_lock. 2) Race since ipvlan_ht_addr_add(port) is called under different ipvlan->addrs_lock locks This should not affect performance, since add/remove IP is a rare situation and spinlock is not taken on fast paths.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisShared resources are accessed without correct locking, so concurrent operations interleave into inconsistent — and sometimes exploitable — states, or deadlock the service outright. These bugs are subtle and timing-dependent. The fix is correct, consistent locking or atomic operations around every shared resource.
General guidance for the improper locking class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
Linux KernelOperating system
>= 4.17, < 5.10.249>= 5.11, < 5.15.199>= 5.16, < 6.1.162>= 6.2, < 6.6.122>= 6.7, < 6.12.68>= 6.13, < 6.18.8= 6.19CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped5.10.2495.15.1996.1.162
Upgrade to kernel 5.10.249+ (if on 5.10.x), 5.15.199+ (if on 5.15.x), 6.1.162+ (if on 6.1.x), or 6.6.122+ (if on 6.2+)
- 1. Identify the currently running Linux kernel version using `uname -r`
- 2. Determine which version branch your kernel falls under from the affected ranges: 5.10.x, 5.15.x, 6.1.x, or 6.2.x
- 3. For kernels in the 5.10.x branch (>=5.10, <5.10.249): upgrade to kernel 5.10.249 or later
- 4. For kernels in the 5.15.x branch (>=5.15, <5.15.199): upgrade to kernel 5.15.199 or later
- 5. For kernels in the 6.1.x branch (>=6.1, <6.1.162): upgrade to kernel 6.1.162 or later
- 6. For kernels in the 6.2+ branch (>=6.2, <6.6.122): upgrade to kernel 6.6.122 or later
- 7. Alternatively, apply the vendor patch commit 04ba6de6eff61238e5397c14ac26a6578c7735a5 to the kernel source and rebuild
- 8. After upgrade/reboot, verify the ipvlan module loads correctly and test ipvlan address operations
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-23103 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-23103 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data