CVE-2026-23253
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: media: dvb-core: fix wrong reinitialization of ringbuffer on reopen dvb_dvr_open() calls dvb_ringbuffer_init() when a new reader opens the DVR device. dvb_ringbuffer_init() calls init_waitqueue_head(), which reinitializes the waitqueue list head to empty. Since dmxdev->dvr_buffer.queue is a shared waitqueue (all opens of the same DVR device share it), this orphans any existing waitqueue entries from io_uring poll or epoll, leaving them with stale prev/next pointers while the list head is reset to {self, self}. The waitqueue and spinlock in dvr_buffer are already properly initialized once in dvb_dmxdev_init(). The open path only needs to reset the buffer data pointer, size, and read/write positions. Replace the dvb_ringbuffer_init() call in dvb_dvr_open() with direct assignment of data/size and a call to dvb_ringbuffer_reset(), which properly resets pread, pwrite, and error with correct memory ordering without touching the waitqueue or spinlock.
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 analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
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>= 2.6.17, < 5.10.253>= 5.11, < 5.15.203>= 5.16, < 6.1.167>= 6.2, < 6.6.130>= 6.7, < 6.12.77>= 6.13, < 6.18.17>= 6.19, < 6.19.7= 7.0CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 · scoped5.10.2535.15.2036.1.167
6.6.130 (or later in 6.6.y stable branch, or 6.1.167+ for 6.1 LTS, or 5.15.203+, or 5.10.253+)
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 5.10.253 or later if using the 5.10.y branch
- Alternatively, upgrade to kernel version 5.15.203 or later if using the 5.15.y branch
- Alternatively, upgrade to kernel version 6.1.167 or later if using the 6.1.y LTS branch
- Alternatively, upgrade to kernel version 6.6.130 or later if using the 6.6.y stable branch
- Reboot the system with the new kernel to apply the fix
- Verify the kernel version post-boot using: uname -r
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-2026-23253 — 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-2026-23253 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