CVE-2026-64139
Linux Kernel 6.1.175 – 6.2
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-2026-64139 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 3th 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-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-45824
Vulnerability Data
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ksmbd: fix SID memory leak in set_posix_acl_entries_dacl() on overflow Commit 299f962c0b02 ("ksmbd: use check_add_overflow() to prevent u16 DACL size overflow") added check_add_overflow() guards that break out of the ACE-building loops…
more
in set_posix_acl_entries_dacl() when the accumulated DACL size would wrap past 65535. However, each iteration allocates a struct smb_sid via kmalloc_obj() at the top of the loop and relies on the kfree(sid) call at the end of the loop body (the 'pass_same_sid' label in the first loop, and the explicit kfree at the tail of the second loop) to release it. The newly introduced 'break' statements bypass those kfree() calls, leaking the sid buffer every time an overflow is detected. A malicious or malformed file with enough POSIX ACL entries to trip the overflow check will leak one or more struct smb_sid allocations on every request that touches the file's DACL, providing a trivial kernel memory exhaustion vector. Free sid before breaking out of the loops to plug the leak.
- 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 (static analysis, fuzzing, or runtime leak detection) directly finds missing deallocation.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can mandate memory-management disciplines that avoid leaks at introduction.
Engineering principles applied during development can require explicit resource-release patterns that stop memory leaks from being coded.
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.