Predictive Vulnerability Intelligence.

Product

  • Product
  • Pricing
  • Documentation

Company

  • About
  • Partnerships
  • Blog
  • Support

Legal

  • Terms
  • Privacy
  • Data Licensing

© 2026 FAUCET Technologies LLC. All rights reserved.

CVE-2026-43323

24
FAUCET Score

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sched/fair: Fix zero_vruntime tracking fix John reported that stress-ng-yield could make his machine unhappy and managed to bisect it to commit b3d99f43c72b ("sched/fair: Fix zero_vruntime tracking"). The combination of yield and that commit was specific enough to hypothesize the following scenario: Suppose we have 2 runnable tasks, both doing yield. Then one will be eligible and one will not be, because the average position must be in between these two entities. Therefore, the runnable task will be eligible, and be promoted a full slice (all the tasks do is yield after all). This causes it to jump over the other task and now the other task is eligible and current is no longer. So we schedule. Since we are runnable, there is no {de,en}queue. All we have is the __{en,de}queue_entity() from {put_prev,set_next}_task(). But per the fingered commit, those two no longer move zero_vruntime. All that moves zero_vruntime are tick and full {de,en}queue. This means, that if the two tasks playing leapfrog can reach the critical speed to reach the overflow point inside one tick's worth of time, we're up a creek. Additionally, when multiple cgroups are involved, there is no guarantee the tick will in fact hit every cgroup in a timely manner. Statistically speaking it will, but that same statistics does not rule out the possibility of one cgroup not getting a tick for a significant amount of time -- however unlikely. Therefore, just like with the yield() case, force an update at the end of every slice. This ensures the update is never more than a single slice behind and the whole thing is within 2 lag bounds as per the comment on entity_key().

First published: May 8, 2026Last modified: May 11, 2026

Impacted Technologies

VendorProductVersion(s)CPE
>= 6.12.78, < 6.12.81CPE matchmatch criteria
cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
>= 6.18.17, < 6.18.22CPE matchmatch criteria
cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
>= 6.19.7, < 6.19.12CPE matchmatch criteria
cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
>= 6.12.78, < 6.12.81CPE match
cpe:2.3:a:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
>= 6.18.17, < 6.18.22CPE match
cpe:2.3:a:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

CVSS Data

CVSS version used by this source: 3.1

5.5MEDIUM

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Attack Vector
LOCAL
Attack Complexity
LOW
Privileges Required
LOW
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality Impact
NONE
Integrity Impact
NONE
Availability Impact
HIGH
Exploitability Score
1.8
Impact Score
3.6
CvssVersion
3.1

Exploit Intelligence

EPSS Score
0.12%
Probability of exploitation in next 30 days
EPSS Percentile
2.3%
Percentile rank of EPSS score among Peer Group
As of 2026-07-27
Model: v2026.06.15
This CVE's current EPSS score of 0.0012 is in the 15th percentile among its peer group of 15,940 CVEs.

Social Chatter

The average CVE in this peer group has 0.0 Twitter, 0.0 Reddit, 0.0 Bluesky, 0.0 Mastodon, and 0.1 GitHub mentions.

Media Mentions

No media coverage found for this CVE.

The average CVE in this peer group has 0.1 InfoSec Media, 0.0 Vendor Blog, and 0.0 Security Researcher mentions.

Remediation

Remediation records are not available for this CVE.

References

git.kernel.org / stable/c/1319ea57529e131822bab56bf417c8edc2db9ae8
Patch
git.kernel.org / stable/c/87573883c30f1a8555ff720836bb6ea231058539
Patch
git.kernel.org / stable/c/c089147074ed96ff4330739a0559394c19a3dfc8
Patch
git.kernel.org / stable/c/fb61ffb3fb30a161eb5404c27fc7635e275beafd
Patch