CVE-2026-97958

Published Sep 25, 2026

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: cls_api: Don't replay RTM_GETCHAIN in tc_ctl_chain(). If a netlink socket sends RTM_GETCHAIN requests repeatedly without recv()ing the responses, tc_ctl_chain() hogs CPU and triggers Hung Task splat. [0] As caught in the stack trace, netlink_attachskb() could confuse tc_ctl_chain() by returning -EAGAIN when the userspace netlink socket's receive buffer is full. The replay: label exists since commit 32a4f5ecd738 ("net: sched: introduce chain object to uapi") but was not used initially. Since commit 9f407f1768d3 ("net: sched: introduce chain templates"), the label is needed for RTM_NEWCHAIN because tcf_proto_lookup_ops() may release RTNL to call request_module(). However, the replay logic is unnecessary for RTM_GETCHAIN. Let's apply the replay logic only for RTM_NEWCHAIN. [0]: INFO: task repro:1018 is blocked on a mutex likely owned by task repro:1022. task:repro state:R running task stack:14096 pid:1022 tgid:1014 ppid:961 task_flags:0x400040 flags:0x00080000 Call Trace: <TASK> ? clockevents_program_event (kernel/time/clockevents.c:372) ? pskb_expand_head (net/core/skbuff.c:615) ? skb_release_data (net/core/skbuff.c:1122) ? netlink_attachskb (./include/linux/skbuff.h:1323 ./include/linux/skbuff.h:1332 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1232) ? __netlink_lookup (./include/linux/rcupdate.h:882 ./include/linux/rhashtable.h:711 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:499) ? tc_chain_notify (net/sched/cls_api.c:3045) ? tc_chain_notify (./include/linux/skbuff.h:1384 net/sched/cls_api.c:3041) ? netlink_unicast (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1335) ? rtnl_unicast (./include/net/netlink.h:1198 net/core/rtnetlink.c:985) ? tc_ctl_chain (net/sched/cls_api.c:3242) ? rtnetlink_rcv_msg (net/core/rtnetlink.c:7146) ? netlink_unicast (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1354) ? __pfx_rtnetlink_rcv_msg (net/core/rtnetlink.c:7177) ? netlink_rcv_skb (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2556) ? netlink_unicast (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1319) ? netlink_sendmsg (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1900) ? __sock_sendmsg (net/socket.c:800) ? __sys_sendto (net/socket.c:2281) ? __x64_sys_sendto (net/socket.c:2288 net/socket.c:2284 net/socket.c:2284) ? do_syscall_64 (arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:61 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:84) ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe (arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:121) </TASK>

Is your site exposed to CVE-2026-97958?

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

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-97958? +
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/sched: cls_api: Don't replay RTM_GETCHAIN in tc_ctl_chain(). If a netlink socket sends RTM_GETCHAIN requests repeatedly without recv()ing the responses, tc_ctl_chain() hogs CPU and triggers Hung Task splat. [0] As caught in the stack trace, netlink_attachskb() could confuse tc_ctl_chain() by returning -EAGAIN when the userspace netlink socket's receive buffer is full. The replay: label exists since commit 32a4f5ecd738 ("net: sched: introduce chain object to uapi") but was not used initially. Since commit 9f407f1768d3 ("net: sched: introduce chain templates"), the label is needed for RTM_NEWCHAIN because tcf_proto_lookup_ops() may release RTNL to call request_module(). However, the replay logic is unnecessary for RTM_GETCHAIN. Let's apply the replay logic only for RTM_NEWCHAIN. [0]: INFO: task repro:1018 is blocked on a mutex likely owned by task repro:1022. task:repro state:R running task stack:14096 pid:1022 tgid:1014 ppid:961 task_flags:0x400040 flags:0x00080000 Call Trace: <TASK> ? clockevents_program_event (kernel/time/clockevents.c:372) ? pskb_expand_head (net/core/skbuff.c:615) ? skb_release_data (net/core/skbuff.c:1122) ? netlink_attachskb (./include/linux/skbuff.h:1323 ./include/linux/skbuff.h:1332 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1232) ? __netlink_lookup (./include/linux/rcupdate.h:882 ./include/linux/rhashtable.h:711 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:499) ? tc_chain_notify (net/sched/cls_api.c:3045) ? tc_chain_notify (./include/linux/skbuff.h:1384 net/sched/cls_api.c:3041) ? netlink_unicast (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1335) ? rtnl_unicast (./include/net/netlink.h:1198 net/core/rtnetlink.c:985) ? tc_ctl_chain (net/sched/cls_api.c:3242) ? rtnetlink_rcv_msg (net/core/rtnetlink.c:7146) ? netlink_unicast (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1354) ? __pfx_rtnetlink_rcv_msg (net/core/rtnetlink.c:7177) ? netlink_rcv_skb (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2556) ? netlink_unicast (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1319) ? netlink_sendmsg (net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1900) ? __sock_sendmsg (net/socket.c:800) ? __sys_sendto (net/socket.c:2281) ? __x64_sys_sendto (net/socket.c:2288 net/socket.c:2284 net/socket.c:2284) ? do_syscall_64 (arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:61 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:84) ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe (arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:121) </TASK>
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2026-97958? +
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-2026-97958 — free, no signup required.