CVE-2026-43097
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: PCI: hv: Fix double ida_free in hv_pci_probe error path If hv_pci_probe() fails after storing the domain number in hbus->bridge->domain_nr, there is a call to free this domain_nr via pci_bus_release_emul_domain_nr(), however, during cleanup, the bridge release callback pci_release_host_bridge_dev() also frees the domain_nr causing ida_free to be called on same ID twice and triggering following warning: ida_free called for id=28971 which is not allocated. WARNING: lib/idr.c:594 at ida_free+0xdf/0x160, CPU#0: kworker/0:2/198 Call Trace: pci_bus_release_emul_domain_nr+0x17/0x20 pci_release_host_bridge_dev+0x4b/0x60 device_release+0x3b/0xa0 kobject_put+0x8e/0x220 devm_pci_alloc_host_bridge_release+0xe/0x20 devres_release_all+0x9a/0xd0 device_unbind_cleanup+0x12/0xa0 really_probe+0x1c5/0x3f0 vmbus_add_channel_work+0x135/0x1a0 Fix this by letting pci core handle the free domain_nr and remove the explicit free called in pci-hyperv driver.
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 analysisThe same block of memory is freed twice, corrupting the allocator's bookkeeping in ways an attacker can shape toward code execution. It usually stems from tangled ownership of a pointer. The fix is clear, single ownership of each allocation and clearing pointers once they are freed.
General guidance for the double free 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>= 6.19, < 6.19.14= 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 · scoped6.19.14
Linux Kernel 6.19.14+ or 7.1+ (depending on branch)
- Check current kernel version with: uname -r
- Upgrade Linux kernel to version 6.19.14 or later (e.g., 6.19.14, 6.19.15, etc.) for systems running kernel 6.19.x
- For systems running kernel 7.0, upgrade to version 7.1 or later
- Reboot the system to apply the new kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version and reviewing the commit 21bc8e0ba5c2a081b0a2808c976d4c9dbddf1e48 is included
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-2026-43097 — 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-2026-43097 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