CVE-2026-53155

NONEPre-NVD 0.0
0.0
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorLow exploitation likelihood right now — keep watching.
  • No confirmed exploitation signals yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS: 0%CVSS: Exploit: NoneExposed: 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:

mm/huge_memory: use correct flags for device private PMD entry

Commit 65edfda6f3f2 ("mm/rmap: extend rmap and migration support device-private entries") updated set_pmd_migration_entry() to use pmdp_huge_get_and_clear() in the softleaf case, but made no further adjustments to the function itself.

Therefore this function continues to incorrectly use pmd_write(), pmd_soft_dirty() and pmd_uffd_wp() to determine whether the installed migration entry should be marked writable, softdirty or uffd-wp respectively.

Whilst all are incorrect, the most problematic of these is pmd_write(), as this can lead to corrupted rmap state.

On x86-64 _PAGE_SWP_SOFT_DIRTY is aliased to _PAGE_RW. So calling pmd_write() on a softleaf will return the softdirty state encoded in the entry, assuming CONFIG_MEM_SOFT_DIRTY was enabled.

This was observed when running the hmm.hmm_device_private.anon_write_child selftest:

  • The test faults in a range then migrates it such that a device-private
THP range is established.
  • The parent then migrates it to a device-private writable PMD entry whose
folio is entirely AnonExclusive with entire_mapcount=1, softdirty set (accidentally correct write state).
  • The parent forks and the PMD entries are set to device-private read only
entries, entire_mapcount=2, softdirty still set.
  • [BUG] The child writes to the range then migrates to RAM - intending to
install non-writable migration entries - but replacing parent and child PMD mappings with WRITABLE entries due to misinterpreting the softdirty bit.
  • In remove_migration_pmd(), if !softleaf_is_migration_read(entry) we
set the RMAP_EXCLUSIVE flag when calling folio_add_anon_rmap_pmd() for both parent and child, which are therefore AnonExclusive.
  • [SPLAT] Child sets migrated folio entire_mapcount=1, parent sets
entire_mapcount=2 and we end up with an AnonExclusive folio with entire_mapcount=2! Assert fires in __folio_add_anon_rmap():

VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_large(folio) && folio_entire_mapcount(folio) > 1 && PageAnonExclusive(cur_page), folio)

This patch fixes the issue by correctly referencing the softleaf entry fields for writable, softdirty and uffd-wp in set_pmd_migration_entry().

It also only updates A/D flags if the entry is present as these are otherwise not meaningful for a softleaf entry.

This patch also flips the if (!present) { ... } else { ... } logic in set_pmd_migration_entry() so it is easier to understand, and adds some comments to make things clearer.

I was able to bisect this to commit 775465fd26a3 ("lib/test_hmm: add zone device private THP test infrastructure") which first exposes this bug as it was the commit that permitted test_hmm to generate the test.

However commit 65edfda6f3f2 ("mm/rmap: extend rmap and migration support device-private entries") is the commit that actually enabled this behaviour.

CVSS v3
EG Score
0.0(none)
EPSS
6.9%
KEV
Not listed

Published

June 25, 2026

Last Modified

June 30, 2026

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-53155(1)

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

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 12× in last 7d / 23× 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.

  1. 2026-07-06 16:27 UTCEPSS rescore
  2. 2026-07-06 16:27 UTCEPSS rescore
  3. 2026-07-06 02:23 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-07-06 02:23 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-07-05 02:31 UTCEPSS rescore
  6. 2026-07-05 02:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  7. 2026-07-04 09:56 UTCGHSA enrichment
  8. 2026-07-04 06:31 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-07-04 06:31 UTCEPSS rescore
  10. 2026-07-01 15:07 UTCEPSS rescore
  11. 2026-07-01 10:01 UTCGHSA enrichment
  12. 2026-06-30 23:22 UTCEPSS rescore
  13. 2026-06-29 14:06 UTCEPSS rescore
  14. 2026-06-29 14:06 UTCEPSS rescore
  15. 2026-06-28 14:07 UTCEPSS rescore
  16. 2026-06-28 10:05 UTCEG score recompute
  17. 2026-06-28 10:05 UTCGHSA enrichment
  18. 2026-06-28 04:56 UTCEPSS rescore
  19. 2026-06-28 04:56 UTCEPSS rescore
  20. 2026-06-27 03:08 UTCEPSS rescore
  21. 2026-06-25 13:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  22. 2026-06-25 10:08 UTCEG score recompute
  23. 2026-06-25 10:08 UTCGHSA enrichment

Frequently asked(4)

What is CVE-2026-53155?
CVE-2026-53155 is a none vulnerability published on June 25, 2026. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/huge_memory: use correct flags for device private PMD entry Commit 65edfda6f3f2 ("mm/rmap: extend rmap and migration support device-private entries") updated setpmdmigration_entry() to use pmdphugegetandclear() in the softleaf…
When was CVE-2026-53155 disclosed?
CVE-2026-53155 was first published in the National Vulnerability Database on June 25, 2026, with the most recent update on June 30, 2026. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2026-53155 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-53155 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 6.9% percentile likelihood of exploitation in the next 30 days — higher percentiles indicate greater predicted risk.
How do I remediate CVE-2026-53155?
Patch to the fixed version published by the affected vendor. Where vendor advisories exist for CVE-2026-53155, 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-2026-53155

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-53155?

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