dbcve.org
VulnerabilityAwaiting classification

CVE-2026-64044

HIGH · 7.8 CVSS v3.1 Developing Published 2026-07-19
No fix yet
No fix has been published. The vendor has not shipped a fixed release or patch. You remain exposed.
See remediation →
80/100
Remediation priority · High
Zero-click 5 weeks old

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 · unedited
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ovpn: respect peer refcount in CMD_NEW_PEER error path ovpn_nl_peer_new_doit()'s error path calls ovpn_peer_release() directly rather than ovpn_peer_put(), bypassing the kref. The accompanying comment ("peer was not yet hashed, thus it is not used in any context") holds for UDP but not for TCP. For UDP, the ovpn_socket union uses the .ovpn arm and never points back at a peer; UDP encap_recv looks up peers via the not-yet-populated hashtables, so the new peer is unreachable until ovpn_peer_add() publishes it. For TCP, ovpn_socket_new() sets ovpn_sock->peer and ovpn_tcp_socket_attach() publishes ovpn_sock via rcu_assign_sk_user_data(). From that moment until ovpn_socket_release() detaches in the error path, the TCP fd is fully wired: userspace recvmsg / sendmsg / close / poll on the fd, as well as the strparser-driven ovpn_tcp_rcv() path, can reach the peer through sk_user_data -> ovpn_sock->peer and bump its refcount via ovpn_peer_hold(). ovpn_tcp_socket_wait_finish() (called inside ovpn_socket_release()) drains strparser and the tx work, but does not synchronize with userspace syscall callers that already hold a peer reference. If ovpn_nl_peer_modify() or ovpn_peer_add() returns an error while such a caller is in flight - notably an ovpn_tcp_recvmsg() blocked in __skb_recv_datagram() on peer->tcp.user_queue - the direct ovpn_peer_release() destroys the peer while the caller still holds the reference, and the eventual ovpn_peer_put() from that caller operates on freed memory. Replace the direct destructor call with ovpn_peer_put() so the kref correctly defers destruction until the last reference is dropped. In the common case where no concurrent user is present, behaviour is unchanged: the kref hits zero immediately and ovpn_peer_release_kref() runs the same destructor. With this conversion ovpn_peer_release() has no callers outside peer.c - ovpn_peer_release_kref() in the same translation unit is the only remaining user - so make it static and drop its declaration from peer.h.

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 · low confidence
Developing — this CVE was published recently and its authoritative NVD entry is still being established, so we're holding a technical summary until the source data settles rather than publish something unreliable. Re-checking after 2026-08-02.

CVSS 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.

From vendor data
No vendor fix exists The vendor has not published a patch for this.

There is no version to upgrade to and no patch to apply. Every affected install stays exposed until the vendor ships a fix — or somebody else builds one.

Add your voice

Free. We build fixes in the order the community asks for them — and we’ll tell you the moment this one lands.

Can’t wait

We develop and verify an original fix where the vendor hasn’t, from $1,950. Deployed to your staging first — never straight to production.

Scope it with us

See what else the community needs solved on the solutions-needed board.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-64044 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-64044 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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