Loading vulnerabilities…
Loading vulnerabilities…
CVE-2026-23300
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: ipv6: fix panic when IPv4 route references loopback IPv6 nexthop When a standalone IPv6 nexthop object is created with a loopback device (e.g., "ip -6 nexthop add id 100 dev lo"), fib6_nh_init() misclassifies it as a reject route. This is because nexthop objects have no destination prefix (fc_dst=::), causing fib6_is_reject() to match any loopback nexthop. The reject path skips fib_nh_common_init(), leaving nhc_pcpu_rth_output unallocated. If an IPv4 route later references this nexthop, __mkroute_output() dereferences NULL nhc_pcpu_rth_output and panics. Simplify the check in fib6_nh_init() to only match explicit reject routes (RTF_REJECT) instead of using fib6_is_reject(). The loopback promotion heuristic in fib6_is_reject() is handled separately by ip6_route_info_create_nh(). After this change, the three cases behave as follows: 1. Explicit reject route ("ip -6 route add unreachable 2001:db8::/64"): RTF_REJECT is set, enters reject path, skips fib_nh_common_init(). No behavior change. 2. Implicit loopback reject route ("ip -6 route add 2001:db8::/32 dev lo"): RTF_REJECT is not set, takes normal path, fib_nh_common_init() is called. ip6_route_info_create_nh() still promotes it to reject afterward. nhc_pcpu_rth_output is allocated but unused, which is harmless. 3. Standalone nexthop object ("ip -6 nexthop add id 100 dev lo"): RTF_REJECT is not set, takes normal path, fib_nh_common_init() is called. nhc_pcpu_rth_output is properly allocated, fixing the crash when IPv4 routes reference this nexthop.
This record: live connection— last retrieved: 24 September 2026 at 05:14.
Taken directly from NVD, CISA or the vendor — sometimes in English, unchanged from the source.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: ipv6: fix panic when IPv4 route references loopback IPv6 nexthop When a standalone IPv6 nexthop object is created with a loopback device (e.g., "ip -6 nexthop add id 100 dev lo"), fib6_nh_init() misclassifies it as a reject route. This is because nexthop objects have no destination prefix (fc_dst=::), causing fib6_is_reject() to match any loopback nexthop. The reject path skips fib_nh_common_init(), leaving nhc_pcpu_rth_output unallocated. If an IPv4 route later references this nexthop, __mkroute_output() dereferences NULL nhc_pcpu_rth_output and panics. Simplify the check in fib6_nh_init() to only match explicit reject routes (RTF_REJECT) instead of using fib6_is_reject(). The loopback promotion heuristic in fib6_is_reject() is handled separately by ip6_route_info_create_nh(). After this change, the three cases behave as follows: 1. Explicit reject route ("ip -6 route add unreachable 2001:db8::/64"): RTF_REJECT is set, enters reject path, skips fib_nh_common_init(). No behavior change. 2. Implicit loopback reject route ("ip -6 route add 2001:db8::/32 dev lo"): RTF_REJECT is not set, takes normal path, fib_nh_common_init() is called. ip6_route_info_create_nh() still promotes it to reject afterward. nhc_pcpu_rth_output is allocated but unused, which is harmless. 3. Standalone nexthop object ("ip -6 nexthop add id 100 dev lo"): RTF_REJECT is not set, takes normal path, fib_nh_common_init() is called. nhc_pcpu_rth_output is properly allocated, fixing the crash when IPv4 routes reference this nexthop.
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Attack vector
LOCAL
Privileges required
LOW
User interaction
NONE
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High
Probability of exploitation within 30 days
0.1%
Percentile
3e
Source: FIRST.org, updated on 23 September 2026.
Limit access to the interactive shell of the additional GNU/Linux subssytem to trusted personnel only.
Our own interpretation and context for the source data above.
IACS Radar assessment
Our own interpretation and context for this vulnerability — not an official source.
IACS Radar priority score
Based on CVSS 5.5, EPSS 0.1%, industrial relevance 55/100.
Combines CVSS, EPSS, KEV status, industrial relevance and exposure relevance — a complement to, not a replacement for, the individual scores below and above.
Conditions for exploitation
Operational impact & energy relevance
Possible loss of visibility of or control over the process upon successful exploitation.
Assessed as relevant to the energy sector based on: Vermeld in een officiële CISA ICS Advisory, wat directe relevantie voor industriële besturingssystemen bevestigt. Vendor "Siemens" is a known supplier of equipment for the energy sector.
Recommended defensive measures
Industrial relevance score
Classification is provisional; manual verification by an OT security analyst is recommended.
Classified by IACS Radar-analysepijplijn (geautomatiseerd) on 24 September 2026.
IEC 62443 mapping
Automatic IACS Radar assessment based on the reported CWE weakness classification; not an official certification statement.