CVE-2026-23248

HIGHNVD 7.87.8
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to NVD's CVSS score.

Score 7.8 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-03-18. NVD baseline CVSS 7.8; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: EPSS, GitHub Security Advisory, NVD CVSS v3
Trending — 3 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-12811 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-78fw-h7fp-fffh (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

7.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.1%CVSS: 7.8Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

A fix is available — apply it.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

perf/core: Fix refcount bug and potential UAF in perf_mmap

Syzkaller reported a refcount_t: addition on 0; use-after-free warning in perf_mmap.

The issue is caused by a race condition between a failing mmap() setup and a concurrent mmap() on a dependent event (e.g., using output redirection).

In perf_mmap(), the ring_buffer (rb) is allocated and assigned to event->rb with the mmap_mutex held. The mutex is then released to perform map_range().

If map_range() fails, perf_mmap_close() is called to clean up. However, since the mutex was dropped, another thread attaching to this event (via inherited events or output redirection) can acquire the mutex, observe the valid event->rb pointer, and attempt to increment its reference count. If the cleanup path has already dropped the reference count to zero, this results in a use-after-free or refcount saturation warning.

Fix this by extending the scope of mmap_mutex to cover the map_range() call. This ensures that the ring buffer initialization and mapping (or cleanup on failure) happens atomically effectively, preventing other threads from accessing a half-initialized or dying ring buffer.

CVSS v3
7.8
EG Score
7.8HIGHmedium confidence
EG Risk
35
EG Risk 35/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity78% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 7.8 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0.1% × 40%
FIRST EPSS: the 30-day exploitation probability when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.1%
EPSS %ILE
2nd
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
7.8 HIGHCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-27). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).

A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

March 18, 2026

Last Modified

October 19, 2026

Advisory Details (3)

Auto-updated Jun 10, 2026
Patch available.
Web page

perf/core: Fix refcount bug and potential UAF in perf_mmap - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c27dea9f50ed525facb62ef647dddc4722456e07
Web page

perf/core: Fix refcount bug and potential UAF in perf_mmap - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ac7ecb65af170a7fc193e7bd8be15dac84ec6a56
Web page

perf/core: Fix refcount bug and potential UAF in perf_mmap - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/77de62ad3de3967818c3dbe656b7336ebee461d2

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-23248(2)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Patch Availability(1)

Vendor / EcosystemFix (by version range) / PatchReleasedSource
linuxKernel @ 6.18.17 (fixes >=6.14.0)—osv

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Affected Packages

(1 across 1 ecosystem)
Debian:14(1)
PackageVulnerable rangeFix by version rangeDependents
linux6.12.100-1 ... 6.19~rc8-1~exp1 (121 versions)
  • every version up to 6.19.8-1: fixed in 6.19.8-1
—

Weakness Classification(2)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 7× in last 7d / 42× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 99 of 265 refreshes on record for this CVE.

A repeat, a row identical to one the same pipeline wrote less than 10 seconds earlier, is not a separate refresh and is not counted. 1 repeat row among the latest 100 is merged into the row it repeats. The 166 oldest rows on record are not shown and were not checked, so the counts can still include repeats.

  1. 2026-11-02 16:44 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  2. 2026-11-01 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  3. 2026-10-31 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  4. 2026-10-30 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  5. 2026-10-27 19:08 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-27 19:08 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-78fw-h7fp-fffh · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  7. 2026-10-27 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  8. 2026-10-26 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  9. 2026-10-25 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  10. 2026-10-25 14:41 UTCEG score recompute
  11. 2026-10-24 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  12. 2026-10-22 16:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  13. 2026-10-21 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  14. 2026-10-20 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS <0.1% · below the 1st percentile
  15. 2026-10-19 19:35 UTCVendor advisory
  16. 2026-10-19 19:35 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-78fw-h7fp-fffh · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  17. 2026-10-19 18:50 UTCEG score recompute
  18. 2026-10-19 18:50 UTCVendor advisory
  19. 2026-10-19 18:49 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-78fw-h7fp-fffh · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  20. 2026-10-19 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  21. 2026-10-18 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  22. 2026-10-18 03:54 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-10-16 16:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  24. 2026-10-16 15:21 UTCEG score recompute
  25. 2026-10-16 15:20 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-78fw-h7fp-fffh · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
Show 74 more
  1. 2026-10-15 16:31 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  2. 2026-10-14 16:32 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  3. 2026-10-13 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  4. 2026-10-12 16:33 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  5. 2026-10-12 16:21 UTCEG score recompute
  6. 2026-10-11 20:03 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-11 17:16 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-10-11 14:48 UTCEG score recompute
  9. 2026-10-11 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  10. 2026-10-11 09:44 UTCOSV refresh
  11. 2026-10-10 20:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  12. 2026-10-09 20:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  13. 2026-10-08 17:11 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  14. 2026-10-07 23:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  15. 2026-10-06 15:17 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  16. 2026-10-05 17:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  17. 2026-10-04 23:21 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  18. 2026-10-01 19:49 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  19. 2026-09-30 15:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  20. 2026-09-29 15:21 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  21. 2026-09-28 13:51 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  22. 2026-09-27 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  23. 2026-09-26 15:58 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  24. 2026-09-26 00:26 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  25. 2026-09-24 14:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  26. 2026-09-21 22:15 UTCOSV refresh
  27. 2026-09-18 19:27 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  28. 2026-09-16 14:07 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  29. 2026-09-16 05:15 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  30. 2026-09-13 16:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  31. 2026-09-12 15:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  32. 2026-09-11 14:52 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  33. 2026-09-10 09:34 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  34. 2026-09-08 22:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  35. 2026-09-07 16:01 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  36. 2026-09-06 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  37. 2026-09-04 05:06 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  38. 2026-09-02 18:08 UTCOSV refresh
  39. 2026-09-02 14:11 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  40. 2026-09-01 13:53 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  41. 2026-09-01 04:39 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  42. 2026-08-30 19:17 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  43. 2026-08-28 21:41 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  44. 2026-08-27 14:25 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  45. 2026-08-26 14:46 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  46. 2026-08-25 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 1st percentile
  47. 2026-08-23 00:19 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  48. 2026-08-20 22:55 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  49. 2026-08-19 17:03 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  50. 2026-08-18 13:48 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  51. 2026-08-17 13:47 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  52. 2026-08-16 14:56 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  53. 2026-08-16 11:17 UTCEG score recompute
  54. 2026-08-16 11:17 UTCVendor advisory
  55. 2026-08-16 11:17 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-78fw-h7fp-fffh · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  56. 2026-08-16 02:14 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  57. 2026-08-15 01:30 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  58. 2026-08-14 19:56 UTCVendor advisory
  59. 2026-08-14 19:56 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-78fw-h7fp-fffh · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  60. 2026-08-14 07:25 UTCEG score recompute
  61. 2026-08-14 07:25 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-78fw-h7fp-fffh · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  62. 2026-08-13 22:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  63. 2026-08-12 22:12 UTCEG score recompute
  64. 2026-08-12 22:12 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-78fw-h7fp-fffh · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  65. 2026-08-12 13:50 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  66. 2026-08-11 21:31 UTCEG score recompute
  67. 2026-08-11 21:31 UTCVendor advisory
  68. 2026-08-11 21:31 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-78fw-h7fp-fffh · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  69. 2026-08-11 13:42 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  70. 2026-08-11 04:38 UTCEG score recompute
  71. 2026-08-11 04:38 UTCVendor advisory
  72. 2026-08-11 04:38 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-78fw-h7fp-fffh · GitHub severity HIGH · GitHub CVSS 7.8
  73. 2026-08-11 00:00 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.1% · 2nd percentile
  74. 2026-08-10 05:58 UTCVendor advisory

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-23248?
CVE-2026-23248 is a high-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on March 18, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf/core: Fix refcount bug and potential UAF in perf_mmap Syzkaller reported a refcount_t: addition on 0; use-after-free warning in perf_mmap. The issue is caused by a race condition between a failing mmap() setup and a concurrent…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-23248 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-23248 was published on March 18, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 19, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-23248 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-23248 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.1% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (2nd percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-23248?
CVE-2026-23248 has a CVSS v3 base score of 7.8 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-23248?
A fix for CVE-2026-23248 is available: update to the fixed version the vendor names in its advisory. The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-23248 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

See which npm, PyPI, Go, and Maven packages are affected by CVE-2026-23248

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-23248?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.