Look up another CVE · open CVE-2026-98849 in the interactive tracker
CVE-2026-98849
pfcp: fix socket lifetime on netdevice registration failure
Published 2026-10-18 (today) by the Linux kernel CNA. Subsystem drivers/net. Debian urgency: unimportant.
What to do, per Debian release
Debian's own status for CVE-2026-98849 in every release this site tracks, and what each one means in practice. Every status below is the one the Debian Security Team publishes for this CVE. source
| Release | Status | Version | What this means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Debian 12bookworm | not affected | 6.1.190-1 | Nothing to do. bookworm never shipped the vulnerable code. |
| Debian 13trixie | fixed | 6.12.113-1 | Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 6.12.113-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts. |
| Debian 14forky | fixed | 7.2.10-1 | Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 7.2.10-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts. |
| Debian unstablesid | fixed | 7.2.10-1 | Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 7.2.10-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts. |
The vulnerability
What the bug is
pfcp_newlink() creates the UDP socket before register_netdevice(). If registration fails after pfcp_dev_init() succeeds, the core calls pfcp_dev_uninit(), which releases the socket and clears pfcp->sk. The newlink error path then releases it again, causing a NULL pointer dereference. This was observed with failslab fault injection: FAULT_INJECTION: forcing a failure. kobject: kobject_add_internal failed for pfcp0 (error: -12 parent: net) BUG: KASAN: null-ptr-deref in udp_tunnel_sock_release+0x1c/0x50 Read of size 8 at addr 0000000000000120 by task ip/1037 Call trace: show_stack+0x18/0x24 (C) dump_stack_lvl+0x78/0x90 print_report+0x468/0x5cc kasan_report+0xa4/0xf0 __asan_load8+0x7c/0xd0 udp_tunnel_sock_release+0x1c/0x50 pfcp_newlink+0x128/0x184 rtnl_newlink+0x848/0xe44 rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x468/0x514 netlink_rcv_skb+0xc0/0x1f0 rtnetlink_rcv+0x18/0x24 netlink_unicast+0x4b8/0x558 netlink_sendmsg+0x2b8/0x584 ... Return from pfcp_del_sock() if pfcp->sk is NULL.
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.
drivers/net/pfcp.c
- What this is
- NETWORKING DRIVERSMAINTAINERS section matched on drivers/net/ · netdev@vger.kernel.org · Maintained
Check it on the machine
grep -w CONFIG_PFCP /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 does not build this code in 3 releases. The build rule could not be established for 1 release, so nothing is claimed about those.
- bookworm?
- trixie, forky, sidn
- ?
- not established - no Makefile entry for the affected file
- n
- not enabled on any flavour - this release does not build the code
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 switch
- CONFIG_PFCP
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
- 2026-10-18 (today)source
- CVSS
- no vector published, unrated
- Attack vector
- not published
- EPSS
- not scored
- CISA KEV
- not listedthe KEV catalogue
- Debian urgency
- unimportantsource
- Subsystem
- drivers/net
Upstream fixes
The versions the CNA records as introducing and fixing this, and the commit for each. source
| Introduced | Fixed in | Commit |
|---|---|---|
| 6.10 | 6.12.113 | dcb8f6a79c33 |
| 6.10 | 6.18.56 | 4b8ce1686dea |
| 6.10 | 7.2.10 | 2cee3603ec1d |
| 6.10 | 7.3 | 0f17d2e3dd9c |
Why the CNA scored it this way
The kernel CNA published no CVSS vector and no reasoning for CVE-2026-98849, which is why it is shown as unrated rather than given an invented score. 6,405 of the 20,413 CVEs here carry reasoning; this is not one of them.