CVE-2026-43194

HIGHNVD 7.57.5
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

Score 7.5 from GitHub Security Advisory (severity: HIGH) published 2026-05-06. NVD baseline CVSS 7.5; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: epss, ghsa, nvd
7.5EG
EchelonGraph verdictPlan a fixSerious severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet.
  • High severity, but no confirmed exploitation yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 1%CVSS: 7.5Exploit: None knownExposed: 0

No vendor fix yet — apply a workaround or compensating control (WAF / firewall / segmentation) and watch for a patch.

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

net: consume xmit errors of GSO frames

udpgro_frglist.sh and udpgro_bench.sh are the flakiest tests currently in NIPA. They fail in the same exact way, TCP GRO test stalls occasionally and the test gets killed after 10min.

These tests use veth to simulate GRO. They attach a trivial ("return XDP_PASS;") XDP program to the veth to force TSO off and NAPI on.

Digging into the failure mode we can see that the connection is completely stuck after a burst of drops. The sender's snd_nxt is at sequence number N [1], but the receiver claims to have received (rcv_nxt) up to N + 3 * MSS [2]. Last piece of the puzzle is that senders rtx queue is not empty (let's say the block in the rtx queue is at sequence number N - 4 * MSS [3]).

In this state, sender sends a retransmission from the rtx queue with a single segment, and sequence numbers N-4*MSS:N-3*MSS [3]. Receiver sees it and responds with an ACK all the way up to N + 3 * MSS [2]. But sender will reject this ack as TCP_ACK_UNSENT_DATA because it has no recollection of ever sending data that far out [1]. And we are stuck.

The root cause is the mess of the xmit return codes. veth returns an error when it can't xmit a frame. We end up with a loss event like this:

------------------------------------------------- | GSO super frame 1 | GSO super frame 2 | |-----------------------------------------------| | seg | seg | seg | seg | seg | seg | seg | seg | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ------------------------------------------------- x ok ok | ok ok ok \\ snd_nxt

"x" means packet lost by veth, and "ok" means it went thru. Since veth has TSO disabled in this test it sees individual segments. Segment 1 is on the retransmit queue and will be resent.

So why did the sender not advance snd_nxt even tho it clearly did send up to seg 8? tcp_write_xmit() interprets the return code from the core to mean that data has not been sent at all. Since TCP deals with GSO super frames, not individual segment the crux of the problem is that loss of a single segment can be interpreted as loss of all. TCP only sees the last return code for the last segment of the GSO frame (in <> brackets in the diagram above).

Of course for the problem to occur we need a setup or a device without a Qdisc. Otherwise Qdisc layer disconnects the protocol layer from the device errors completely.

We have multiple ways to fix this.

1) make veth not return an error when it lost a packet. While this is what I think we did in the past, the issue keeps reappearing and it's annoying to debug. The game of whack a mole is not great.

2) fix the damn return codes We only talk about NETDEV_TX_OK and NETDEV_TX_BUSY in the documentation, so maybe we should make the return code from ndo_start_xmit() a boolean. I like that the most, but perhaps some ancient, not-really-networking protocol would suffer.

3) make TCP ignore the errors It is not entirely clear to me what benefit TCP gets from interpreting the result of ip_queue_xmit()? Specifically once the connection is established and we're pushing data - packet loss is just packet loss?

4) this fix Ignore the rc in the Qdisc-less+GSO case, since it's unreliable. We already always return OK in the TCQ_F_CAN_BYPASS case. In the Qdisc-less case let's be a bit more conservative and only mask the GSO errors. This path is taken by non-IP-"networks" like CAN, MCTP etc, so we could regress some ancient thing. This is the simplest, but also maybe the hackiest fix?

Similar fix has been proposed by Eric in the past but never committed because original reporter was working with an OOT driver and wasn't providing feedback (see Link).

CVSS v3
7.5
EG Score
7.5(medium)
EG Risk
38(Track)
EG Risk 38/100SSVC: Track

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score: it fuses intrinsic severity with real-world exploitation and automatability so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner. Distinct from the 0–10 EG Score (severity).

How it’s computed
Severity75% × 45%
Exploitation1% × 40%
Automatability30% × 15%
Action: Routine — remediate on your standard cadence.
EPSS PROB
1%
EPSS %ILE
42%
KEV
Not listed

Published

May 6, 2026

Last Modified

May 11, 2026

Advisory Details (8)

Auto-updated May 11, 2026
No patch confirmed yet.
generic

net: consume xmit errors of GSO frames - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ea5d7787635e26ec1194ec7eec0e8e5ae3bd10a5
generic

net: consume xmit errors of GSO frames - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c86901d22c89a6bf4e2f013e948aaabc60869893
generic

net: consume xmit errors of GSO frames - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ae3f627b45fbc3c776a4e484696f3cad7cbb4eca
generic

net: consume xmit errors of GSO frames - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/9ac6aebef4b4bfc5ed408b0b65645981574bc780
generic

net: consume xmit errors of GSO frames - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/7aa767d0d3d04e50ae94e770db7db8197f666970
generic

net: consume xmit errors of GSO frames - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/56bd32c0edca34041a5c215887fcf562fae2e2db
generic

net: consume xmit errors of GSO frames - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4cb163e9efcac4cd35c3043e097f25081a5c015c
generic

net: consume xmit errors of GSO frames - kernel/git/stable/linux.git - Linux kernel stable tree

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/0c9de092ef8c50a7ee9612811566f0aa81d8d7b6

Patch Availability(1)

Vendor / EcosystemFixed in / PatchReleasedSource
linuxKernel @ 5.10.252osv

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.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 9× in last 7d / 31× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. 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. Most recent first.

Showing the most recent 100 of 111 total refreshes for this CVE.

  1. 2026-07-27 14:13 UTCEPSS rescore
  2. 2026-07-26 14:54 UTCEPSS rescore
  3. 2026-07-26 14:54 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-07-25 14:18 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-07-24 14:17 UTCEPSS rescore
  6. 2026-07-23 14:18 UTCEPSS rescore
  7. 2026-07-23 03:13 UTCEG score recompute
  8. 2026-07-22 14:08 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-07-21 15:24 UTCEPSS rescore
  10. 2026-07-20 17:08 UTCEPSS rescore
  11. 2026-07-20 09:04 UTCOSV refresh
  12. 2026-07-19 14:31 UTCEPSS rescore
  13. 2026-07-19 02:29 UTCEPSS rescore
  14. 2026-07-18 10:04 UTCEPSS rescore
  15. 2026-07-16 17:03 UTCEPSS rescore
  16. 2026-07-15 16:57 UTCEPSS rescore
  17. 2026-07-15 02:00 UTCEPSS rescore
  18. 2026-07-13 22:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  19. 2026-07-13 06:13 UTCEPSS rescore
  20. 2026-07-12 05:46 UTCEPSS rescore
  21. 2026-07-11 08:27 UTCEPSS rescore
  22. 2026-07-09 19:10 UTCEPSS rescore
  23. 2026-07-08 15:16 UTCEPSS rescore
  24. 2026-07-07 13:46 UTCEPSS rescore
  25. 2026-07-06 16:27 UTCEPSS rescore
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-07-06 02:23 UTCEPSS rescore
  2. 2026-07-05 02:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  3. 2026-07-04 06:31 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-07-01 15:06 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-06-30 23:22 UTCEPSS rescore
  6. 2026-06-29 14:06 UTCEPSS rescore
  7. 2026-06-28 14:07 UTCEPSS rescore
  8. 2026-06-28 04:56 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-06-27 03:08 UTCEPSS rescore
  10. 2026-06-25 13:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  11. 2026-06-25 13:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  12. 2026-06-24 14:05 UTCEPSS rescore
  13. 2026-06-23 21:33 UTCEPSS rescore
  14. 2026-06-22 14:25 UTCEPSS rescore
  15. 2026-06-22 14:25 UTCEPSS rescore
  16. 2026-06-21 14:56 UTCEPSS rescore
  17. 2026-06-21 14:56 UTCEPSS rescore
  18. 2026-06-21 01:59 UTCEPSS rescore
  19. 2026-06-19 19:25 UTCEPSS rescore
  20. 2026-06-18 17:52 UTCEPSS rescore
  21. 2026-06-18 17:52 UTCEPSS rescore
  22. 2026-06-17 17:53 UTCEPSS rescore
  23. 2026-06-16 17:52 UTCEPSS rescore
  24. 2026-06-15 17:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  25. 2026-06-14 20:20 UTCGHSA enrichment
  26. 2026-06-14 07:36 UTCGHSA enrichment
  27. 2026-06-13 23:00 UTCEPSS rescore
  28. 2026-06-13 00:29 UTCGHSA enrichment
  29. 2026-06-12 23:12 UTCEPSS rescore
  30. 2026-06-12 23:12 UTCEPSS rescore
  31. 2026-06-12 03:15 UTCGHSA enrichment
  32. 2026-06-11 14:31 UTCGHSA enrichment
  33. 2026-06-11 14:00 UTCEPSS rescore
  34. 2026-06-11 01:47 UTCGHSA enrichment
  35. 2026-06-10 22:18 UTCEPSS rescore
  36. 2026-06-10 13:22 UTCEPSS rescore
  37. 2026-06-10 13:22 UTCEPSS rescore
  38. 2026-06-10 12:24 UTCGHSA enrichment
  39. 2026-06-09 23:41 UTCGHSA enrichment
  40. 2026-06-09 10:57 UTCGHSA enrichment
  41. 2026-06-08 22:14 UTCGHSA enrichment
  42. 2026-06-08 14:17 UTCEPSS rescore
  43. 2026-06-08 14:17 UTCEPSS rescore
  44. 2026-06-08 07:09 UTCGHSA enrichment
  45. 2026-06-07 18:26 UTCGHSA enrichment
  46. 2026-06-07 15:25 UTCEPSS rescore
  47. 2026-06-07 15:25 UTCEPSS rescore
  48. 2026-06-07 05:41 UTCGHSA enrichment
  49. 2026-06-06 16:58 UTCGHSA enrichment
  50. 2026-06-06 13:47 UTCEPSS rescore
  51. 2026-06-06 13:47 UTCEPSS rescore
  52. 2026-06-06 04:14 UTCGHSA enrichment
  53. 2026-06-05 22:47 UTCEPSS rescore
  54. 2026-06-05 15:29 UTCGHSA enrichment
  55. 2026-06-05 06:10 UTCEPSS rescore
  56. 2026-06-05 06:10 UTCEPSS rescore
  57. 2026-06-05 02:43 UTCGHSA enrichment
  58. 2026-06-04 13:59 UTCGHSA enrichment
  59. 2026-06-04 01:15 UTCGHSA enrichment
  60. 2026-06-03 12:31 UTCGHSA enrichment
  61. 2026-06-02 23:47 UTCGHSA enrichment
  62. 2026-06-02 20:13 UTCEPSS rescore
  63. 2026-06-02 11:02 UTCGHSA enrichment
  64. 2026-06-01 22:17 UTCGHSA enrichment
  65. 2026-06-01 13:52 UTCEPSS rescore
  66. 2026-06-01 13:52 UTCEPSS rescore
  67. 2026-06-01 09:34 UTCGHSA enrichment
  68. 2026-05-31 22:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  69. 2026-05-31 22:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  70. 2026-05-31 00:16 UTCEPSS rescore
  71. 2026-05-31 00:16 UTCEPSS rescore
  72. 2026-05-29 13:44 UTCEPSS rescore
  73. 2026-05-29 13:44 UTCEPSS rescore
  74. 2026-05-28 13:44 UTCEPSS rescore
  75. 2026-05-28 13:44 UTCEPSS rescore

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-43194?
CVE-2026-43194 is a high vulnerability published on May 6, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: consume xmit errors of GSO frames udpgrofrglist.sh and udpgrobench.sh are the flakiest tests currently in NIPA. They fail in the same exact way, TCP GRO test stalls occasionally and the test gets killed after 10min. These…
When was CVE-2026-43194 disclosed?
CVE-2026-43194 was first published in the National Vulnerability Database on May 6, 2026, with the most recent update on May 11, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2026-43194 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-43194 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 1% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days, which ranks it in the top 58.2% of all scored CVEs.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-43194?
CVE-2026-43194 has a CVSS v3 base score of 7.5 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-43194?
Patch to the fixed version published by the affected vendor. Where vendor advisories exist for CVE-2026-43194, EchelonGraph cross-links them in the Vendor Advisories panel below — those typically contain the canonical remediation steps, fixed version numbers, and any vendor-specific mitigations.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-43194

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-43194?

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