Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-53267 is a high-severity Uncontrolled Recursion (CWE-674) vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SC-5 (Denial-of-service Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-39218
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfilter: nft_ct: bail out on template ct in get eval I noticed this issue while looking at a historic syzbot report [1]. A rule like the one below is enough…
more
to trigger the bug: table ip t { chain pre { type filter hook prerouting priority raw; ct zone set 1 ct original saddr 1.2.3.4 accept } } The first expression attaches a per-cpu template ct via nft_ct_set_zone_eval() (nf_ct_tmpl_alloc -> kzalloc, tuple is all zero, nf_ct_l3num(ct) == 0). The next expression then calls nft_ct_get_eval() on the same skb, treats the template as a real ct and hits the 16-byte memcpy path. With dreg at NFT_REG32_15 this overflows past struct nft_regs on the kernel stack; with smaller dreg values it silently clobbers adjacent registers. Reject template ct at the eval entry and in nft_ct_get_fast_eval(), mirroring the check nft_ct_set_eval() already has. Additionally, bound the address copy in NFT_CT_SRC / NFT_CT_DST by priv->len instead of by nf_ct_l3num(ct): nf_ct_get_tuple() zeroes the tuple before pkt_to_tuple() fills in only the protocol-relevant leading bytes, so the trailing bytes of tuple->{src,dst}.u3.all are well-defined zero. priv->len is validated at rule load, so the copy size is now bounded by the destination register rather than by an untrusted field on the conntrack. [1]: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=389cf09cb72926114fce90dc85a2c3231dcb647c
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Input validation can reject or constrain data that would otherwise drive unbounded recursive calls.
DoS protection mechanisms limit the resource-exhaustion impact of uncontrolled recursion without eliminating the flaw.
System monitoring can observe anomalous resource consumption that signals runaway recursion after it begins.
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 coding errors such as missing recursion limits or termination conditions.
Runtime monitoring of compute resources can detect excessive consumption caused by uncontrolled recursion.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover and record uncontrolled recursion flaws before deployment.
Capacity monitoring and resource provisioning can absorb or limit the impact of runaway recursion.
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 excessive recursion via static analysis or fuzzing.
Secure development life cycle requires controls that prevent uncontrolled recursion through design and code review.
Application security requirements can mandate recursion limits or stack-depth checks.
Secure system architecture principles include resource-management and input-validation rules that limit recursion.
Secure coding standards directly prohibit or constrain recursive constructs that could exhaust stack or memory.
Capacity management includes monitoring and limits that mitigate resource exhaustion from runaway recursion.