CVE-2026-43105
Linux Kernel 4.5 – 6.6.136
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-43105 is a medium-severity Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime (CWE-401) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); 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 SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-27620
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/vc4: Fix memory leak of BO array in hang state The hang state's BO array is allocated separately with kzalloc() in vc4_save_hang_state() but never freed in vc4_free_hang_state(). Add the missing…
more
kfree() for the BO array before freeing the hang state struct.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Kernel memory leak enables local resource exhaustion leading to endpoint DoS via repeated triggering of affected code path.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires applying the kernel patch that adds the missing kfree() for the BO array, eliminating the CWE-401 leak.
Mandates developer testing (including dynamic analysis and fuzzing) that would have detected the unpaired kzalloc/kfree in vc4_save_hang_state and vc4_free_hang_state.
Requires use of secure development tools and standards (e.g., memory-safety checkers) during vc4 driver implementation to avoid unreleased allocations.
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 enforce proper memory allocation/deallocation via coding standards, reviews, and tooling.
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 can detect unreleased memory, providing partial coverage of the weakness.
Secure development life cycle mandates memory-management practices that reduce missing-release defects.
Application security requirements can specify explicit memory-release rules, partially mitigating the weakness.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles include resource-management guidelines that address memory leaks.
Secure coding standards directly require proper allocation/deallocation, covering most of this weakness.
Capacity management may detect memory exhaustion symptoms but does not prevent the coding flaw.