We use necessary cookies to keep DataHouse.pl working and optional cookies for analytics and marketing. You can accept all, reject optional cookies, or configure your choices.

OK, I AGREE I DISAGREE CHANGE THE CONSENTS

Thanks to cookies and similar technologies (hereinafter referred to as "cookies"), we can improve the functionality of our website and display content tailored to your needs and expectations.

For more information on the use of cookies, please see our [Cookie Policy].

I agree to:

Analytical use of cookies

Marketing use of cookies

Use of necessary cookies (always active)

Your preferences regarding cookies, expressed after logging in to the website, will be assigned to your Datahouse.pl account. This ensures that it is also saved if you sign in to your account from another device or browser.

CONFIRM SELECTION CANCEL

CVE-2026-43203: linux kernel vulnerability

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: atm: fore200e: fix use-after-free in tasklets during device removal When the PCA-200E or SBA-200E adapter is being detached, the fore200e is deallocated. However, the tx_tasklet or rx_tasklet may still be running or pending, leading to use-after-free bug when the already freed fore200e is accessed again in fore200e_tx_tasklet() or fore200e_rx_tasklet(). One of the race conditions can occur as follows: CPU 0 (cleanup) | CPU 1 (tasklet) fore200e_pca_remove_one() | fore200e_interrupt() fore200e_shutdown() | tasklet_schedule() kfree(fore200e) | fore200e_tx_tasklet() | fore200e-> // UAF Fix this by ensuring tx_tasklet or rx_tasklet is properly canceled before the fore200e is released. Add tasklet_kill() in fore200e_shutdown() to synchronize with any pending or running tasklets. Moreover, since fore200e_reset() could prevent further interrupts or data transfers, the tasklet_kill() should be placed after fore200e_reset() to prevent the tasklet from being rescheduled in fore200e_interrupt(). Finally, it only needs to do tasklet_kill() when the fore200e state is greater than or equal to FORE200E_STATE_IRQ, since tasklets are uninitialized in earlier states. In a word, the tasklet_kill() should be placed in the FORE200E_STATE_IRQ branch within the switch...case structure. This bug was identified through static analysis.

CVE-2026-43203CVSS 7.5Linux

CVE-2026-43203: linux kernel vulnerability

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: atm: fore200e: fix use-after-free in tasklets during device removal When the PCA-200E or SBA-200E adapter is being detached, the fore200e is deallocated. However, the tx_tasklet or rx_tasklet may still be running or pending, leading to use-after-free bug when the already freed fore200e is accessed again in fore200e_tx_tasklet() or fore200e_rx_tasklet(). One of the race conditions can occur as follows: CPU 0 (cleanup) | CPU 1 (tasklet) fore200e_pca_remove_one() | fore200e_interrupt() fore200e_shutdown() | tasklet_schedule() kfree(fore200e) | fore200e_tx_tasklet() | fore200e-> // UAF Fix this by ensuring tx_tasklet or rx_tasklet is properly canceled before the fore200e is released. Add tasklet_kill() in fore200e_shutdown() to synchronize with any pending or running tasklets. Moreover, since fore200e_reset() could prevent further interrupts or data transfers, the tasklet_kill() should be placed after fore200e_reset() to prevent the tasklet from being rescheduled in fore200e_interrupt(). Finally, it only needs to do tasklet_kill() when the fore200e state is greater than or equal to FORE200E_STATE_IRQ, since tasklets are uninitialized in earlier states. In a word, the tasklet_kill() should be placed in the FORE200E_STATE_IRQ branch within the switch...case structure. This bug was identified through static analysis.

CVSS: 7.5 HIGH
EPSS: 35.01%
Known exploited: not in KEV
Product: linux kernel

What is known

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: atm: fore200e: fix use-after-free in tasklets during device removal When the PCA-200E or SBA-200E adapter is being detached, the fore200e is deallocated. However, the tx_tasklet or rx_tasklet may still be running or pending, leading to use-after-free bug when the already freed fore200e is accessed again in fore200e_tx_tasklet() or fore200e_rx_tasklet(). One of the race conditions can occur as follows: CPU 0 (cleanup) | CPU 1 (tasklet) fore200e_pca_remove_one() | fore200e_interrupt() fore200e_shutdown() | tasklet_schedule() kfree(fore200e) | fore200e_tx_tasklet() | fore200e-> // UAF Fix this by ensuring tx_tasklet or rx_tasklet is properly canceled before the fore200e is released. Add tasklet_kill() in fore200e_shutdown() to synchronize with any pending or running tasklets. Moreover, since fore200e_reset() could prevent further interrupts or data transfers, the tasklet_kill() should be placed after fore200e_reset() to prevent the tasklet from being rescheduled in fore200e_interrupt(). Finally, it only needs to do tasklet_kill() when the fore200e state is greater than or equal to FORE200E_STATE_IRQ, since tasklets are uninitialized in earlier states. In a word, the tasklet_kill() should be placed in the FORE200E_STATE_IRQ branch within the switch...case structure. This bug was identified through static analysis.

Sources

Back to security hub Contact DataHouse