Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-23082 is a medium-severity Infinite Loop (CWE-835) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 2th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) and SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-5460
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: can: gs_usb: gs_usb_receive_bulk_callback(): unanchor URL on usb_submit_urb() error In commit 7352e1d5932a ("can: gs_usb: gs_usb_receive_bulk_callback(): fix URB memory leak"), the URB was re-anchored before usb_submit_urb() in gs_usb_receive_bulk_callback() to prevent a leak…
more
of this URB during cleanup. However, this patch did not take into account that usb_submit_urb() could fail. The URB remains anchored and usb_kill_anchored_urbs(&parent->rx_submitted) in gs_can_close() loops infinitely since the anchor list never becomes empty. To fix the bug, unanchor the URB when an usb_submit_urb() error occurs, also print an info message.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
CWE-835 infinite loop in kernel USB driver error path enables local DoS via application/system exploitation.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires timely identification and remediation of coding flaws such as the missing unanchor on usb_submit_urb failure that produces the CWE-835 infinite loop.
Requires developer testing and evaluation that would exercise error paths in gs_usb_receive_bulk_callback and gs_can_close to detect unreachable loop exits.
Mandates use of secure development processes and tools that enforce proper error handling and resource cleanup on all URB submission paths.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing can uncover infinite-loop conditions before release.
Secure development life cycle mandates practices that can detect and prevent infinite-loop defects.
Application security requirements can specify loop-termination rules, indirectly reducing the weakness.
Secure coding standards directly address loop termination and prevent infinite loops.
Secure architecture principles encourage designs that avoid unreachable exit conditions.
Change management can require review of loop logic when code is modified.