CVE-2026-31507

HIGH
Published Apr 22, 2026 Modified Apr 28, 2026 CWE-415

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/smc: fix double-free of smc_spd_priv when tee() duplicates splice pipe buffer smc_rx_splice() allocates one smc_spd_priv per pipe_buffer and stores the pointer in pipe_buffer.private. The pipe_buf_operations for these buffers used .get = generic_pipe_buf_get, which only increments the page reference count when tee(2) duplicates a pipe buffer. The smc_spd_priv pointer itself was not handled, so after tee() both the original and the cloned pipe_buffer share the same smc_spd_priv *. When both pipes are subsequently released, smc_rx_pipe_buf_release() is called twice against the same object: 1st call: kfree(priv) sock_put(sk) smc_rx_update_cons() [correct] 2nd call: kfree(priv) sock_put(sk) smc_rx_update_cons() [UAF] KASAN reports a slab-use-after-free in smc_rx_pipe_buf_release(), which then escalates to a NULL-pointer dereference and kernel panic via smc_rx_update_consumer() when it chases the freed priv->smc pointer: BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in smc_rx_pipe_buf_release+0x78/0x2a0 Read of size 8 at addr ffff888004a45740 by task smc_splice_tee_/74 Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x53/0x70 print_report+0xce/0x650 kasan_report+0xc6/0x100 smc_rx_pipe_buf_release+0x78/0x2a0 free_pipe_info+0xd4/0x130 pipe_release+0x142/0x160 __fput+0x1c6/0x490 __x64_sys_close+0x4f/0x90 do_syscall_64+0xa6/0x1a0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f </TASK> BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000020 RIP: 0010:smc_rx_update_consumer+0x8d/0x350 Call Trace: <TASK> smc_rx_pipe_buf_release+0x121/0x2a0 free_pipe_info+0xd4/0x130 pipe_release+0x142/0x160 __fput+0x1c6/0x490 __x64_sys_close+0x4f/0x90 do_syscall_64+0xa6/0x1a0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f </TASK> Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception Beyond the memory-safety problem, duplicating an SMC splice buffer is semantically questionable: smc_rx_update_cons() would advance the consumer cursor twice for the same data, corrupting receive-window accounting. A refcount on smc_spd_priv could fix the double-free, but the cursor-accounting issue would still need to be addressed separately. The .get callback is invoked by both tee(2) and splice_pipe_to_pipe() for partial transfers; both will now return -EFAULT. Users who need to duplicate SMC socket data must use a copy-based read path.

Is your site exposed to CVE-2026-31507?

Run a free security scan — no signup, results in seconds.

CVSS v3.1 Score

7.8
HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

EPSS — Exploit Prediction

0.0001
Probability of exploitation
0.02%
Percentile rank

EPSS estimates the probability that this vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. A higher score means more likely to be exploited.

Weakness Type (CWE)

CWE-415 CWE-415

Affected Products

Vendor Product
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel
linux linux_kernel

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-31507? +
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/smc: fix double-free of smc_spd_priv when tee() duplicates splice pipe buffer smc_rx_splice() allocates one smc_spd_priv per pipe_buffer and stores the pointer in pipe_buffer.private. The pipe_buf_operations for these buffers used .get = generic_pipe_buf_get, which only increments the page reference count when tee(2) duplicates a pipe buffer. The smc_spd_priv pointer itself was not handled, so after tee() both the original and the cloned pipe_buffer share the same smc_spd_priv *. When both pipes are subsequently released, smc_rx_pipe_buf_release() is called twice against the same object: 1st call: kfree(priv) sock_put(sk) smc_rx_update_cons() [correct] 2nd call: kfree(priv) sock_put(sk) smc_rx_update_cons() [UAF] KASAN reports a slab-use-after-free in smc_rx_pipe_buf_release(), which then escalates to a NULL-pointer dereference and kernel panic via smc_rx_update_consumer() when it chases the freed priv->smc pointer: BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in smc_rx_pipe_buf_release+0x78/0x2a0 Read of size 8 at addr ffff888004a45740 by task smc_splice_tee_/74 Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x53/0x70 print_report+0xce/0x650 kasan_report+0xc6/0x100 smc_rx_pipe_buf_release+0x78/0x2a0 free_pipe_info+0xd4/0x130 pipe_release+0x142/0x160 __fput+0x1c6/0x490 __x64_sys_close+0x4f/0x90 do_syscall_64+0xa6/0x1a0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f </TASK> BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000020 RIP: 0010:smc_rx_update_consumer+0x8d/0x350 Call Trace: <TASK> smc_rx_pipe_buf_release+0x121/0x2a0 free_pipe_info+0xd4/0x130 pipe_release+0x142/0x160 __fput+0x1c6/0x490 __x64_sys_close+0x4f/0x90 do_syscall_64+0xa6/0x1a0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f </TASK> Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception Beyond the memory-safety problem, duplicating an SMC splice buffer is semantically questionable: smc_rx_update_cons() would advance the consumer cursor twice for the same data, corrupting receive-window accounting. A refcount on smc_spd_priv could fix the double-free, but the cursor-accounting issue would still need to be addressed separately. The .get callback is invoked by both tee(2) and splice_pipe_to_pipe() for partial transfers; both will now return -EFAULT. Users who need to duplicate SMC socket data must use a copy-based read path. It has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.8 (HIGH).
How severe is CVE-2026-31507? +
CVE-2026-31507 has a CVSS v3.1 score of 7.8 out of 10, rated HIGH. This is a high-severity vulnerability that should be prioritized for patching. The EPSS score is 0.0001, placing it in the 0th percentile for exploitation probability.
What products are affected by CVE-2026-31507? +
CVE-2026-31507 affects products from linux, specifically: linux_kernel. Check the affected products table above for specific version ranges.
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2026-31507? +
You can use Secably's free Website Scanner to check your website for known vulnerabilities. For infrastructure scanning, use the Port Scanner to identify exposed services that may be affected. Check the vendor advisories linked above for specific patch and version information.

Related Vulnerabilities

Don't wait for an exploit

Scan your website for vulnerabilities like CVE-2026-31507 — free, no signup required.