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-2026-52965 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 5th 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-2026-38833
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/ttm: Fix ttm_bo_swapout() infinite LRU walk on swapout failure When ttm_tt_swapout() fails, the current code calls ttm_resource_add_bulk_move() followed by ttm_resource_move_to_lru_tail() to restore the resource's bulk_move membership. However, ttm_resource_move_to_lru_tail() places the…
more
resource at the tail of the LRU list which, relative to the walk cursor's hitch node (placed immediately after the resource when it was yielded), puts the resource *in front of the* the hitch. The next list_for_each_entry_continue() from the hitch finds the same resource again, causing an infinite loop. Fix by deferring del_bulk_move to the success path only. On the success path, TTM_TT_FLAG_SWAPPED has just been set by ttm_tt_swapout() but the resource is still tracked in the bulk_move range, so ttm_resource_del_bulk_move()'s !ttm_resource_unevictable() guard would incorrectly skip the removal. Introduce ttm_resource_del_bulk_move_unevictable() which bypasses that guard.
- 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 evaluation can discover unreachable loop exit conditions through static analysis, fuzzing, or execution tracing.
Flaw remediation processes identify and correct infinite-loop defects reported from testing or operations.
Requiring documented development processes and secure coding standards reduces introduction of loops whose termination conditions are unreachable.
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.