Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2026-53082
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: net: hamradio: 6pack: fix uninit-value in sixpack_receive_buf sixpack_receive_buf() does not properly skip bytes with TTY error flags. The while loop iterates through the flags buffer but never advances the data pointer (cp), and passes the original count (including error bytes) to sixpack_decode(). This causes sixpack_decode() to process bytes that should have been skipped due to TTY errors. The TTY layer does not guarantee that cp[i] holds a meaningful value when fp[i] is set, so passing those positions to sixpack_decode() results in KMSAN reporting an uninit-value read. Fix this by processing bytes one at a time, advancing cp on each iteration, and only passing valid (non-error) bytes to sixpack_decode(). This matches the pattern used by slip_receive_buf() and mkiss_receive_buf() for the same purpose.
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 analysis · high confidenceIn the Linux kernel's net/hamradio/6pack driver, the sixpack_receive_buf() function has an uninitialized value read vulnerability. The while loop iterates through TTY error flags but fails to advance the data pointer or skip error bytes, passing potentially uninitialized data to sixpack_decode(). This causes KMSAN to detect an uninit-value read when the TTY layer provides no meaningful data for error-flagged positions.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
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
>= 2.6.12.1, < 5.10.258>= 5.11, < 5.15.209>= 5.16, < 6.1.175>= 6.2, < 6.6.141>= 6.7, < 6.12.91>= 6.13, < 6.18.33>= 6.19, < 7.0.10= 2.6.12CVSS 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
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check your running Linux kernel versionRun `uname -r` or check `/proc/version` to get the exact kernel versionAffected if The kernel version falls within any of these ranges: >= 2.6.12.1 and < 5.10.258; >= 5.11 and < 5.15.209; >= 5.16 and < 6.1.175; >= 6.2 and < 6.6.141; >= 6.7 and < 6.12.91; >= 6.13 and < 6.18.33; >= 6.19 and < 7.0.10; or equals 2.6.12
-
Verify if the 6pack kernel module is loadedRun `lsmod | grep 6pack` to check if the 6pack module is currently loaded in memoryAffected if The 6pack module is loaded and actively used by the hamradio 6pack protocol stack
-
Check for 6pack device nodes or configurationLook for 6pack-related device entries in /dev or check for 6pack interface configurations using `ip link show` or `ax25ctl` if the ax25 stack is in useAffected if Any 6pack network interfaces or devices are configured or active on the system
You are affected if your kernel version is in the affected ranges AND the 6pack hamradio driver is loaded or actively used on your system.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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 · scoped5.10.2585.15.2096.1.175
Apply the upstream kernel patch that fixes sixpack_receive_buf() to process bytes one at a time, advance the data pointer on each iteration, and only pass non-error bytes to sixpack_decode(), matching the pattern used by slip_receive_buf() and mkiss_receive_buf().
Linux kernel >= 5.10.258 (or 5.15.209, 6.1.175, or 6.6.141 depending on your branch)
- Identify the current running kernel version using `uname -r`
- Determine which version branch your kernel is based on (e.g., 5.10.x, 5.15.x, 6.1.x, or 6.2-6.6.x)
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to a version that includes the fix: for 5.10.x branch use >= 5.10.258, for 5.15.x use >= 5.15.209, for 6.1.x use >= 6.1.175, or for 6.2-6.6.x use >= 6.6.141
- Use your distribution's package manager to install the updated kernel (e.g., `apt-get update && apt-get install linux-image-*` for Debian/Ubuntu, or `yum/dnf update kernel` for RHEL/Fedora)
- Reboot the system to load the patched kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version with `uname -r`
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Linux Kernel
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,192.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-53082 — 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-2026-53082 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