Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2026-43389
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: mm: memfd_luo: always dirty all folios A dirty folio is one which has been written to. A clean folio is its opposite. Since a clean folio has no user data, it can be freed under memory pressure. memfd preservation with LUO saves the flag at preserve(). This is problematic. The folio might get dirtied later. Saving it at freeze() also doesn't work, since the dirty bit from PTE is normally synced at unmap and there might still be mappings of the file at freeze(). To see why this is a problem, say a folio is clean at preserve, but gets dirtied later. The serialized state of the folio will mark it as clean. After retrieve, the next kernel will see the folio as clean and might try to reclaim it under memory pressure. This will result in losing user data. Mark all folios of the file as dirty, and always set the MEMFD_LUO_FOLIO_DIRTY flag. This comes with the side effect of making all clean folios un-reclaimable. This is a cost that has to be paid for participants of live update. It is not expected to be a common use case to preserve a lot of clean folios anyway. Since the value of pfolio->flags is a constant now, drop the flags variable and set it directly.
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
Linux KernelOperating system
>= 6.19, < 6.19.9= 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
- 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 · scoped6.19.9
Linux Kernel 6.19.9 or later for 6.19.x branch; Linux Kernel 7.1 or later for 7.x branch
- 1. Identify the current running kernel version using `uname -r`
- 2. Check if the version is affected: >= 6.19 and < 6.19.9, or exactly 7.0
- 3. Update the Linux kernel package to version 6.19.9 or later (for systems on 6.19.x)
- 4. For systems running kernel 7.0, upgrade to version 7.1 or later
- 5. Reboot the system to load the patched kernel
- 6. Verify the kernel version after reboot with `uname -r` to confirm the fix is applied
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-2026-43389 — 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-2026-43389 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