CVE-2026-23086
Linux Kernel vulnerability analysis and mitigation

Overview

CVE-2026-23086 is a memory exhaustion (denial-of-service) vulnerability in the Linux kernel's virtio vsock transport layer, specifically in the TX credit mechanism. The flaw allows a malicious guest or host to advertise an excessively large socket buffer size, causing the victim endpoint to queue an uncontrolled amount of kernel memory in sk_buff structures. It affects Linux kernel versions from 4.8 up to (but not including) 6.1.162, 6.2–6.6.x before 6.6.122, 6.7–6.12.x before 6.12.68, and 6.13–6.18.x before 6.18.8, as well as 6.19-rc1 through rc6. First published on February 4, 2026, with patches released March 17, 2026, it carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.5 (Medium) (Feedly).

Technical details

The root cause is improper resource control (CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption) in the virtio vsock transport's TX credit accounting. The TX credit window is derived directly from peer_buf_alloc, a value set by the remote endpoint via SO_VM_SOCKETS_BUFFER_SIZE, without being bounded by the local endpoint's own buf_alloc configuration. A malicious peer can advertise a very large buffer (e.g., 2 GiB) and then read data slowly, forcing the victim to continuously queue sk_buff memory up to the peer-advertised limit. The vulnerability affects virtio-vsock, vhost-vsock, and loopback transports, since they share the same code base. The fix introduces a virtio_transport_tx_buf_size() helper that returns min(peer_buf_alloc, buf_alloc), ensuring the effective TX window is bounded by both the peer's advertised buffer and the local configuration (Feedly, Kernel Patch).

Impact

Successful exploitation results in severe availability impact with no effect on confidentiality or integrity. A malicious guest using 32 vsock connections each advertising 2 GiB of buffer caused Slab/SUnreclaim memory to grow from approximately 0.5 GiB to ~57 GiB on a 64 GiB Ubuntu 22.04 host, rendering the system unresponsive and requiring the QEMU process to be killed to recover. The attack is bidirectional — a malicious host can equally exhaust guest kernel memory — and affects any virtualization environment using virtio-vsock, vhost-vsock, or loopback vsock transports (Feedly).

Exploitation steps

  1. Setup: Obtain access to a guest VM (or host) running an unpatched Linux kernel (e.g., 4.8–6.18.7) with virtio-vsock support enabled.
  2. Open multiple vsock connections: From the malicious guest, establish a large number of vsock connections to the host (e.g., 32 connections) using the vsock API targeting the host's CID.
  3. Advertise large buffer: For each connection, set SO_VM_SOCKETS_BUFFER_SIZE to a very large value (e.g., 2 GiB) before or after connecting, causing the guest to advertise peer_buf_alloc = 2 GiB to the host.
  4. Send data without reading: Continuously write data into each vsock connection from the guest side without reading from the guest's receive buffer, causing the host to queue sk_buff memory up to the peer-advertised 2 GiB limit per connection.
  5. Exhaust host memory: With 32 connections × 2 GiB each, the host's kernel Slab/SUnreclaim memory grows rapidly (demonstrated: ~0.5 GiB to ~57 GiB), causing the host to become unresponsive or OOM-kill critical processes (Feedly).

Indicators of compromise

  • Kernel Memory: Rapid and sustained growth of Slab and SUnreclaim memory visible in /proc/meminfo; values climbing to tens of GiB without corresponding application-level memory usage.
  • Process: High number of vsock connections from a single guest CID observable via ss -x or ss --vsock; QEMU process consuming abnormally large amounts of kernel memory.
  • Logs: Kernel OOM killer messages in /var/log/kern.log or dmesg related to kvm/qemu processes; kernel warnings about excessive socket buffer allocation.
  • Network: Unusually high number of active vsock connections (e.g., 30+) from a single guest, visible via ss -a --vsock on the host; connections remaining open with large send queues and minimal receive activity.

Mitigation and workarounds

Apply the patched Linux kernel versions: 6.1.162 or later (for 4.8–6.1.x), 6.6.122 or later (for 6.2–6.6.x), 6.12.68 or later (for 6.7–6.12.x), or 6.18.8 or later (for 6.13–6.18.x). Patches are available from the kernel stable branches at git.kernel.org. As a partial workaround prior to patching, configure cgroup memory limits on QEMU/virtualization workloads to cap maximum memory allocation, and set conservative SO_VM_SOCKETS_BUFFER_MAX_SIZE values to limit the maximum TX window size — note these do not fully remediate the vulnerability (Feedly, Kernel Patch).

Community reactions

Vendor advisories have been issued by SUSE (SUSE-2026-0962-1), Oracle Linux (ELISA-2026-50160, ELSA-2026-50232), and Ubuntu (USN-8393-1), indicating broad distribution-level response to the vulnerability. Google Cloud release notes also reference the fix. Coverage has appeared on Linux security news aggregators and German Linux community sites, reflecting standard industry response to a kernel DoS vulnerability without significant broader media attention (Feedly).

Additional resources


SourceThis report was generated using AI

Related Linux Kernel vulnerabilities:

CVE ID

Severity

Score

Technologies

Component name

CISA KEV exploit

Has fix

Published date

CVE-2026-64557NONEN/A
  • Linux Kernel logoLinux Kernel
  • kernel-rt-selftests-internal
NoNoJul 29, 2026
CVE-2026-64556NONEN/A
  • Linux Kernel logoLinux Kernel
  • kernel-64k-devel
NoNoJul 29, 2026
CVE-2026-64555NONEN/A
  • Linux Kernel logoLinux Kernel
  • linux-azure-fde-6.14
NoNoJul 27, 2026
CVE-2026-64554NONEN/A
  • Linux Kernel logoLinux Kernel
  • linux-gcp-6.14
NoYesJul 27, 2026
CVE-2026-64553NONEN/A
  • Linux Kernel logoLinux Kernel
  • kernel-rt-64k-debug-modules-internal
NoYesJul 27, 2026

Free Vulnerability Assessment

Benchmark your Cloud Security Posture

Evaluate your cloud security practices across 9 security domains to benchmark your risk level and identify gaps in your defenses.

Request assessment

Get a personalized demo

Ready to see Wiz in action?

"Best User Experience I have ever seen, provides full visibility to cloud workloads."
David EstlickCISO
"Wiz provides a single pane of glass to see what is going on in our cloud environments."
Adam FletcherChief Security Officer
"We know that if Wiz identifies something as critical, it actually is."
Greg PoniatowskiHead of Threat and Vulnerability Management