CVE-2026-45855
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: ata: libata-scsi: avoid Non-NCQ command starvation When a non-NCQ command is issued while NCQ commands are being executed, ata_scsi_qc_issue() indicates to the SCSI layer that the command issuing should be deferred by returning SCSI_MLQUEUE_XXX_BUSY. This command deferring is correct and as mandated by the ACS specifications since NCQ and non-NCQ commands cannot be mixed. However, in the case of a host adapter using multiple submission queues, when the target device is under a constant load of NCQ commands, there are no guarantees that requeueing the non-NCQ command will be executed later and it may be deferred again repeatedly as other submission queues can constantly issue NCQ commands from different CPUs ahead of the non-NCQ command. This can lead to very long delays for the execution of non-NCQ commands, and even complete starvation for these commands in the worst case scenario. Since the block layer and the SCSI layer do not distinguish between queueable (NCQ) and non queueable (non-NCQ) commands, libata-scsi SAT implementation must ensure forward progress for non-NCQ commands in the presence of NCQ command traffic. This is similar to what SAS HBAs with a hardware/firmware based SAT implementation do. Implement such forward progress guarantee by limiting requeueing of non-NCQ commands from ata_scsi_qc_issue(): when a non-NCQ command is received and NCQ commands are in-flight, do not force a requeue of the non-NCQ command by returning SCSI_MLQUEUE_XXX_BUSY and instead return 0 to indicate that the command was accepted but hold on to the qc using the new deferred_qc field of struct ata_port. This deferred qc will be issued using the work item deferred_qc_work running the function ata_scsi_deferred_qc_work() once all in-flight commands complete, which is checked with the port qc_defer() callback return value indicating that no further delay is necessary. This check is done using the helper function ata_scsi_schedule_deferred_qc() which is called from ata_scsi_qc_complete(). This thus excludes this mechanism from all internal non-NCQ commands issued by ATA EH. When a port deferred_qc is non NULL, that is, the port has a command waiting for the device queue to drain, the issuing of all incoming commands (both NCQ and non-NCQ) is deferred using the regular busy mechanism. This simplifies the code and also avoids potential denial of service problems if a user issues too many non-NCQ commands. Finally, whenever ata EH is scheduled, regardless of the reason, a deferred qc is always requeued so that it can be retried once EH completes. This is done by calling the function ata_scsi_requeue_deferred_qc() from ata_eh_set_pending(). This avoids the need for any special processing for the deferred qc in case of NCQ error, link or device reset, or device timeout.
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>= 5.10, < 6.12.77>= 6.13, < 6.18.14>= 6.19, < 6.19.4CVSS 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 · scoped6.12.776.18.146.19.4
Linux kernel 6.12.77, 6.18.14, or 6.19.4 (or later stable releases in respective branches)
- Identify the current kernel version using `uname -r` or `cat /proc/version`
- Determine if the running version falls within affected ranges: >= 5.10 and < 6.12.77, OR >= 6.13 and < 6.18.14, OR >= 6.19 and < 6.19.4
- If affected, schedule a maintenance window for kernel upgrade
- Upgrade to a kernel version >= 6.12.77 (if staying in 6.12.x branch), >= 6.18.14 (if staying in 6.13-6.18.x branch), or >= 6.19.4 (if using 6.19.x branch)
- Reboot the system to load the new kernel
- Verify the running kernel version is no longer affected 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-2026-45855 — 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-2026-45855 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