<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 20:44:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>BELL-CVE-2026-23400</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bell-cve-2026-23400</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Alpaquita:stream: linux-lts&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Alpaquita:stream: linux-lts&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/bell-cve-2026-23400</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>EUVD-2026-315520</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-315520</link>
      <description>EUVD-2026-315520</description>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/euvd-2026-315520</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>fkie_cve-2026-23400</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-23400</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;rust_binder: call set_notification_done() without proc lock&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Consider the following sequence of events on a death listener:
1. The remote process dies and sends a BR_DEAD_BINDER message.
2. The local process invokes the BC_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION command.
3. The local process then invokes the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE.
Then, the kernel will reply to the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE command with a
BR_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION_DONE reply using push_work_if_looper().&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, this can result in a deadlock if the current thread is not a
looper. This is because dead_binder_done() still holds the proc lock
during set_notification_done(), which called push_work_if_looper().
Normally, push_work_if_looper() takes the thread lock, which is fine to
take under the proc lock. But if the current thread is not a looper,
then it falls back to delivering the reply to the process work queue,
which involves taking the proc lock. Since the proc lock is already
held, this is a deadlock.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix this by releasing the proc lock during set_notification_done(). It
was not intentional that it was held during that function to begin with.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I don&amp;#39;t think this ever happens in Android because BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE
is only invoked in response to BR_DEAD_BINDER messages, and the kernel
always delivers BR_DEAD_BINDER to a looper. So there&amp;#39;s no scenario where
Android userspace will call BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE on a non-looper thread.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;rust_binder: call set_notification_done() without proc lock&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Consider the following sequence of events on a death listener:
1. The remote process dies and sends a BR_DEAD_BINDER message.
2. The local process invokes the BC_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION command.
3. The local process then invokes the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE.
Then, the kernel will reply to the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE command with a
BR_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION_DONE reply using push_work_if_looper().&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, this can result in a deadlock if the current thread is not a
looper. This is because dead_binder_done() still holds the proc lock
during set_notification_done(), which called push_work_if_looper().
Normally, push_work_if_looper() takes the thread lock, which is fine to
take under the proc lock. But if the current thread is not a looper,
then it falls back to delivering the reply to the process work queue,
which involves taking the proc lock. Since the proc lock is already
held, this is a deadlock.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix this by releasing the proc lock during set_notification_done(). It
was not intentional that it was held during that function to begin with.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I don&amp;#39;t think this ever happens in Android because BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE
is only invoked in response to BR_DEAD_BINDER messages, and the kernel
always delivers BR_DEAD_BINDER to a looper. So there&amp;#39;s no scenario where
Android userspace will call BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE on a non-looper thread.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/fkie_cve-2026-23400</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>GHSA-pff6-g7ww-p3v3</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-pff6-g7ww-p3v3</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;rust_binder: call set_notification_done() without proc lock&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Consider the following sequence of events on a death listener:
1. The remote process dies and sends a BR_DEAD_BINDER message.
2. The local process invokes the BC_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION command.
3. The local process then invokes the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE.
Then, the kernel will reply to the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE command with a
BR_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION_DONE reply using push_work_if_looper().&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, this can result in a deadlock if the current thread is not a
looper. This is because dead_binder_done() still holds the proc lock
during set_notification_done(), which called push_work_if_looper().
Normally, push_work_if_looper() takes the thread lock, which is fine to
take under the proc lock. But if the current thread is not a looper,
then it falls back to delivering the reply to the process work queue,
which involves taking the proc lock. Since the proc lock is already
held, this is a deadlock.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix this by releasing the proc lock during set_notification_done(). It
was not intentional that it was held during that function to begin with.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I don&amp;#39;t think this ever happens in Android because BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE
is only invoked in response to BR_DEAD_BINDER messages, and the kernel
always delivers BR_DEAD_BINDER to a looper. So there&amp;#39;s no scenario where
Android userspace will call BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE on a non-looper thread.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;rust_binder: call set_notification_done() without proc lock&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Consider the following sequence of events on a death listener:
1. The remote process dies and sends a BR_DEAD_BINDER message.
2. The local process invokes the BC_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION command.
3. The local process then invokes the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE.
Then, the kernel will reply to the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE command with a
BR_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION_DONE reply using push_work_if_looper().&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, this can result in a deadlock if the current thread is not a
looper. This is because dead_binder_done() still holds the proc lock
during set_notification_done(), which called push_work_if_looper().
Normally, push_work_if_looper() takes the thread lock, which is fine to
take under the proc lock. But if the current thread is not a looper,
then it falls back to delivering the reply to the process work queue,
which involves taking the proc lock. Since the proc lock is already
held, this is a deadlock.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix this by releasing the proc lock during set_notification_done(). It
was not intentional that it was held during that function to begin with.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I don&amp;#39;t think this ever happens in Android because BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE
is only invoked in response to BR_DEAD_BINDER messages, and the kernel
always delivers BR_DEAD_BINDER to a looper. So there&amp;#39;s no scenario where
Android userspace will call BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE on a non-looper thread.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ghsa-pff6-g7ww-p3v3</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>UBUNTU-CVE-2026-23400</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2026-23400</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Ubuntu:16.04:LTS: linux-hwe-edge, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.0, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure-edge, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gcp, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gcp-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gke-4.15, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gke-5.4 and 82 more&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: rust_binder: call set_notification_done() without proc lock Consider the following sequence of events on a death listener: 1. The remote process dies and sends a BR_DEAD_BINDER message. 2. The local process invokes the BC_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION command. 3. The local process then invokes the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE. Then, the kernel will reply to the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE command with a BR_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION_DONE reply using push_work_if_looper(). However, this can result in a deadlock if the current thread is not a looper. This is because dead_binder_done() still holds the proc lock during set_notification_done(), which called push_work_if_looper(). Normally, push_work_if_looper() takes the thread lock, which is fine to take under the proc lock. But if the current thread is not a looper, then it falls back to delivering the reply to the process work queue, which involves taking the proc lock. Since the proc lock is already held, this is a deadlock. Fix this by releasing the proc lock during set_notification_done(). It was not intentional that it was held during that function to begin with. I don&amp;#39;t think this ever happens in Android because BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE is only invoked in response to BR_DEAD_BINDER messages, and the kernel always delivers BR_DEAD_BINDER to a looper. So there&amp;#39;s no scenario where Android userspace will call BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE on a non-looper thread.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Ubuntu:16.04:LTS: linux-hwe-edge, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.0, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-aws-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-azure-edge, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gcp, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gcp-5.3, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gke-4.15, Ubuntu:18.04:LTS: linux-gke-5.4 and 82 more&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: rust_binder: call set_notification_done() without proc lock Consider the following sequence of events on a death listener: 1. The remote process dies and sends a BR_DEAD_BINDER message. 2. The local process invokes the BC_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION command. 3. The local process then invokes the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE. Then, the kernel will reply to the BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE command with a BR_CLEAR_DEATH_NOTIFICATION_DONE reply using push_work_if_looper(). However, this can result in a deadlock if the current thread is not a looper. This is because dead_binder_done() still holds the proc lock during set_notification_done(), which called push_work_if_looper(). Normally, push_work_if_looper() takes the thread lock, which is fine to take under the proc lock. But if the current thread is not a looper, then it falls back to delivering the reply to the process work queue, which involves taking the proc lock. Since the proc lock is already held, this is a deadlock. Fix this by releasing the proc lock during set_notification_done(). It was not intentional that it was held during that function to begin with. I don&amp;#39;t think this ever happens in Android because BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE is only invoked in response to BR_DEAD_BINDER messages, and the kernel always delivers BR_DEAD_BINDER to a looper. So there&amp;#39;s no scenario where Android userspace will call BC_DEAD_BINDER_DONE on a non-looper thread.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/ubuntu-cve-2026-23400</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>WID-SEC-W-2026-0910 — Linux Kernel: Mehrere Schwachstellen ermöglichen Denial of Service</title>
      <link>https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-0910</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service Angriff durchzuführen oder andere, nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Linux Kernel ausnutzen, um einen Denial of Service Angriff durchzuführen oder andere, nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://cve.radiocsirt.org/vuln/wid-sec-w-2026-0910</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
