Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-31551 is a medium-severity Wrap or Wraparound (CWE-191) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-25444
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: wifi: mac80211: Fix static_branch_dec() underflow for aql_disable. syzbot reported static_branch_dec() underflow in aql_enable_write(). [0] The problem is that aql_enable_write() does not serialise concurrent write()s to the debugfs. aql_enable_write() checks static_key_false(&aql_disable.key)…
more
and later calls static_branch_inc() or static_branch_dec(), but the state may change between the two calls. aql_disable does not need to track inc/dec. Let's use static_branch_enable() and static_branch_disable(). [0]: val == 0 WARNING: kernel/jump_label.c:311 at __static_key_slow_dec_cpuslocked.part.0+0x107/0x120 kernel/jump_label.c:311, CPU#0: syz.1.3155/20288 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 20288 Comm: syz.1.3155 Tainted: G U L syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Tainted: [U]=USER, [L]=SOFTLOCKUP Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 01/24/2026 RIP: 0010:__static_key_slow_dec_cpuslocked.part.0+0x107/0x120 kernel/jump_label.c:311 Code: f2 c9 ff 5b 5d c3 cc cc cc cc e8 54 f2 c9 ff 48 89 df e8 ac f9 ff ff eb ad e8 45 f2 c9 ff 90 0f 0b 90 eb a2 e8 3a f2 c9 ff 90 <0f> 0b 90 eb 97 48 89 df e8 5c 4b 33 00 e9 36 ff ff ff 0f 1f 80 00 RSP: 0018:ffffc9000b9f7c10 EFLAGS: 00010293 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffffff9b3e5d40 RCX: ffffffff823c57b4 RDX: ffff8880285a0000 RSI: ffffffff823c5846 RDI: ffff8880285a0000 RBP: 0000000000000000 R08: 0000000000000005 R09: 0000000000000000 R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: 000000000000000a R13: 1ffff9200173ef88 R14: 0000000000000001 R15: ffffc9000b9f7e98 FS: 00007f530dd726c0(0000) GS:ffff8881245e3000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 0000200000001140 CR3: 000000007cc4a000 CR4: 00000000003526f0 Call Trace: <TASK> __static_key_slow_dec_cpuslocked kernel/jump_label.c:297 [inline] __static_key_slow_dec kernel/jump_label.c:321 [inline] static_key_slow_dec+0x7c/0xc0 kernel/jump_label.c:336 aql_enable_write+0x2b2/0x310 net/mac80211/debugfs.c:343 short_proxy_write+0x133/0x1a0 fs/debugfs/file.c:383 vfs_write+0x2aa/0x1070 fs/read_write.c:684 ksys_pwrite64 fs/read_write.c:793 [inline] __do_sys_pwrite64 fs/read_write.c:801 [inline] __se_sys_pwrite64 fs/read_write.c:798 [inline] __x64_sys_pwrite64+0x1eb/0x250 fs/read_write.c:798 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xc9/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f RIP: 0033:0x7f530cf9aeb9 Code: ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 0f 1f 44 00 00 48 89 f8 48 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d 01 f0 ff ff 73 01 c3 48 c7 c1 e8 ff ff ff f7 d8 64 89 01 48 RSP: 002b:00007f530dd72028 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000012 RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007f530d215fa0 RCX: 00007f530cf9aeb9 RDX: 0000000000000003 RSI: 0000000000000000 RDI: 0000000000000010 RBP: 00007f530d008c1f R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 R10: 4200000000000005 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000000 R13: 00007f530d216038 R14: 00007f530d215fa0 R15: 00007ffde89fb978 </TASK>
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and static/dynamic analysis directly find integer underflow defects before code is released.
Security engineering principles require use of safe arithmetic constructs or language features that structurally eliminate integer underflow during subtraction.
Input validation can reject or sanitize values that would cause a subtraction to underflow the representable range.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly prevent integer underflow defects via input validation, bounds checking, and static analysis.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis can surface underflow flaws after they are introduced.
Routine patching can remediate known underflow bugs once they are discovered in deployed software.
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 in development catches integer underflow defects before release.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and arithmetic checks that prevent integer underflow.
Application security requirements include bounds checking and safe arithmetic to avoid underflow conditions.
Secure architecture principles require defensive coding patterns that mitigate integer wraparound risks.
Secure coding standards directly prescribe safe integer handling and overflow/underflow prevention.