CVE-2026-68095

What the bug is

This fixes this race: - thread a: io_uring_enter -> register sqe -> fuse_uring_create_ring_ent -> allocate ent but doesn't grab queue_ref yet - thread b: fuse_conn_destroy() -> fuse_chan_abort() -> fuse_uring_abort() is a no-op due to queue ref being 0 - thread a: grabs the queue_ref, queue_ref is now 1, rest of fuse_uring_do_register() logic executes - thread b: fuse_chan_abort() returns, fuse_chan_wait_aborted() now runs and calls "wait_event(ring->stop_waitq, atomic_read(&ring->queue_refs) == 0);" The abort/unmount thread will hang indefinitely in unkillable state as nothing will decrement queue_refs or wake stop_waitq, and the ring, queue, and ent are leaked. Fix this by checking fch->connected under fch->lock after the created ent has grabbed a ref count on the queue. This ensures that in the scenario above, it is guaranteed that we either release the queue ref and wake up stop_waitq (in case fuse_chan_wait_aborted() is already waiting) in fuse_uring_do_register() when we detect !fch->connected, or if the connection is aborted after the check, it is guaranteed that the async teardown worker will be running in the background cleaning up ents and decrementing the ent's ref on the queue, which will unblock the eventual queue and ring teardown.

Where it lives

The fix touches these files. If the subsystem is one you do not use, the practical exposure is lower, though the package is still the vulnerable one.

fs/fuse/dev_uring.c

What this is

FUSE FILESYSTEM [IO-URING]MAINTAINERS section matched on fs/fuse/dev_uring.c · fuse-devel@lists.linux.dev · Maintained

Check it on the machine

grep -wE 'CONFIG_FUSE_FS|CONFIG_FUSE_IO_URING' /boot/config-$(uname -r)

Reads the booted kernel's own configuration, on the machine and nowhere else. =y is built in, =m is a module, and an is not set line means the code is not there.

Show whether Debian builds this, per release

Debian builds this code. Every release with an answer below compiles the affected file into the kernels it ships. The build rule could not be established for 2 releases, so nothing is claimed about those.

• bookworm, trixie?
• forky, sidy

?

not established - no Makefile entry for the affected file

y

built into the kernel image on every flavour - only a patch removes it

Where a release above reads "not established", no build rule for the affected file was found in that release's kernel tree. That is a gap in this lookup, not a finding that the code is absent.

Build switches

CONFIG_FUSE_FS, CONFIG_FUSE_IO_URING

Reads as

all on means the file is compiled; any one off means it is not.

From the configuration Debian publishes for every kernel flavour it builds. It covers only the architectures Debian ships a linux-config package for, and nothing about a kernel you built yourself. Debian's own status above stays authoritative about the source package.MAINTAINERS kbuild Makefiles Debian linux-config packages

Signals

Published

2026-08-10 (2 months ago)source

CVSS

no vector published, unrated

Attack vector

not published

EPSS

0.17%, higher than 5.5% of all CVEssource

CISA KEV

not listedthe KEV catalogue

Debian urgency

unimportantsource

Subsystem

fs/fuse

Upstream fixes

The versions the CNA records as introducing and fixing this, and the commit for each. source

Introduced	Fixed in	Commit
6.14	6.18.42	3bca70235a70
6.14	7.1.6	2cd945492bc5
6.14	7.2	952b5d36f6a2