CVE-2026-64262

Published Jul 25, 2026

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fuse-uring: end fuse_req on io-uring cancel task work When io_uring delivers task work with tw.cancel set (PF_EXITING, PF_KTHREAD fallback, or percpu_ref_is_dying on the ring context), fuse_uring_send_in_task() takes the cancel branch, assigns -ECANCELED, and falls through to fuse_uring_send(). That path only flips the entry to FRRS_USERSPACE and completes the io_uring cmd; it never discharges the ring entry's owning reference to the fuse_req that fuse_uring_add_req_to_ring_ent() handed it at dispatch time. fuse_uring_send_in_task() tw.cancel == true err = -ECANCELED fuse_uring_send(ent, cmd, err, issue_flags) ent->state = FRRS_USERSPACE list_move(&ent->list, &queue->ent_in_userspace) ent->cmd = NULL io_uring_cmd_done(-ECANCELED) /* ent->fuse_req still set, req still hashed */ The fuse_req stays linked on fpq->processing[hash] and fuse_request_end() is never invoked. The originating syscall thread blocks in D-state in request_wait_answer() until fuse_abort_conn() runs, which can be the entire connection lifetime. For FR_BACKGROUND requests fc->num_background is never decremented either, so repeated cancels inflate the counter until max_background is hit and all later background ops stall. tw.cancel does not imply a connection abort (e.g. a single io_uring worker thread exits while the fuse connection stays up), so this cannot be left for fuse_abort_conn() to clean up. Ending the req but still routing the entry through fuse_uring_send() is not enough: that leaves a req-less entry on ent_in_userspace, and ent_list_request_expired() dereferences ent->fuse_req unconditionally on the head of that list, which would then NULL-deref. Fix the cancel branch to release the entry directly. Remove it from the queue, complete the io_uring cmd, end the fuse_req, free the entry, and drop its queue_refs (waking the teardown waiter if it was the last).

Is your site exposed to CVE-2026-64262?

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

EPSS — Exploit Prediction

0.0021
Probability of exploitation
0.11%
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.

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-64262? +
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fuse-uring: end fuse_req on io-uring cancel task work When io_uring delivers task work with tw.cancel set (PF_EXITING, PF_KTHREAD fallback, or percpu_ref_is_dying on the ring context), fuse_uring_send_in_task() takes the cancel branch, assigns -ECANCELED, and falls through to fuse_uring_send(). That path only flips the entry to FRRS_USERSPACE and completes the io_uring cmd; it never discharges the ring entry's owning reference to the fuse_req that fuse_uring_add_req_to_ring_ent() handed it at dispatch time. fuse_uring_send_in_task() tw.cancel == true err = -ECANCELED fuse_uring_send(ent, cmd, err, issue_flags) ent->state = FRRS_USERSPACE list_move(&ent->list, &queue->ent_in_userspace) ent->cmd = NULL io_uring_cmd_done(-ECANCELED) /* ent->fuse_req still set, req still hashed */ The fuse_req stays linked on fpq->processing[hash] and fuse_request_end() is never invoked. The originating syscall thread blocks in D-state in request_wait_answer() until fuse_abort_conn() runs, which can be the entire connection lifetime. For FR_BACKGROUND requests fc->num_background is never decremented either, so repeated cancels inflate the counter until max_background is hit and all later background ops stall. tw.cancel does not imply a connection abort (e.g. a single io_uring worker thread exits while the fuse connection stays up), so this cannot be left for fuse_abort_conn() to clean up. Ending the req but still routing the entry through fuse_uring_send() is not enough: that leaves a req-less entry on ent_in_userspace, and ent_list_request_expired() dereferences ent->fuse_req unconditionally on the head of that list, which would then NULL-deref. Fix the cancel branch to release the entry directly. Remove it from the queue, complete the io_uring cmd, end the fuse_req, free the entry, and drop its queue_refs (waking the teardown waiter if it was the last).
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2026-64262? +
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.

Don't wait for an exploit

Scan your website for vulnerabilities like CVE-2026-64262 — free, no signup required.