AEGLIX vulnerability intelligence
CVE-2026-99252
UNSCORED · Received
Published: 2026-11-03 · Updated: 2026-11-03 · Source: NVD
Stored catalog record
Source record retrieved 2026-11-03T23:31:58.252221+00:00. Scheduled imports handle updates; this page does not assert that the provider was queried just now.
Continue your research
Connect this record to stored reporting, reviewed campaign mentions and source-domain investigation. These are research leads, not inferred attack relationships.
Open CVE research in Investigate · Find Arsenal listings referencing this CVE
Vulnerability overview
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: io_uring/mpscq: disable preemption while pushing A push makes the node the new tail, and then links it to its predecessor. In between the queue isn't empty, but mpscq_pop() can't get at the node. The consumers deal with that by trying again, with a cond_resched() in the loop to give a preempted producer the chance to finish. cond_resched() doesn't do that if the consumer has a higher priority than the producer and both have to use the same CPU: producer (SCHED_OTHER) consumer (SCHED_FIFO), same CPU io_req_local_work_add() mpscq_push() prev = xchg(&q->tail, node) <preempted> io_cqring_wait() __io_run_local_work() again: cond_resched() // nothing to do mpscq_pop() // NULL // work pending, no events yet goto again The producer can be any task that is able to queue task_work for the ring: an io-wq worker, or somebody who sends a message with IORING_OP_MSG_RING. The consumer spins, holding ->uring_lock, until the scheduler takes pity on the fair class, which takes about a second with the default settings of the fair server, and forever without it. The loops in tctx_task_work_run() and io_cancel_local_task_work() have the same problem. Don't allow preemption between the two steps. That bounds the time the window is open on the CPU of the producer by what interrupts take, and a consumer that waits for that is on another CPU. The cost is a preempt_disable()/preempt_enable() pair per push.
Patch review priority
Assess exposure and vendor guidance
- No higher-priority signal is available in the current stored evidence.
- Fresh EPSS data is unavailable; missing values are not zero.
EPSS unavailable; no zero score is assumed.
EPSS estimates probability of exploitation in the next 30 days. It does not measure your exposure or prove exploitation. The elevated threshold is 10%; CISA KEV takes precedence. About FIRST EPSS ↗
Severity and scoring
- CVSS score
- Not scored · UNSCORED
- CVSS version
- Not supplied
- CVSS vector
- Not supplied
- Weaknesses
- Not supplied
CVSS measures technical severity; it does not establish whether this vulnerability is being exploited in your environment.
Known exploitation and remediation
Not listed in the CISA catalog retrieved for this record. This does not establish that exploitation has not occurred.
Verify affected versions and patch availability in the vendor advisory before making changes.
Affected products and versions
NVD has not supplied affected-version configurations for this record. Check the vendor references below.