CVE-2026-93824

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tls: reject the combination of TLS and sockmap TLS and sockmap (BPF psock) integration hides a lot of latent bugs. Bugs which may be more or less relevant for real users but they are definitely exploitable. We could not find anyone actively using this integration so let's reject this config. Adding a TLS socket to a sockmap was already rejected by sk_psock_init() through the inet_csk_has_ulp() check. We need to reject the attempts to configure the TLS keys (rather than adding the ULP itself) because checking prior to the ULP installation is tricky without risking a race with sockmap getting added in parallel (sockmap does not hold the socket lock). This patch is a minimal rejection of the feature. Subsequent patch in the series will do a light dead code removal. Full cleanup would require a major rewrite of the Tx path, we don't need skmsg any more.

Is your site exposed to CVE-2026-93824?

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

EPSS — Exploit Prediction

0.0017

Probability of exploitation

0.06%

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

Other References

https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/460e6486617c17dd19abe8f3fc67d9a6fa25f8ca https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a08e780b6cc1153cbff8be55de9ec9da809e344f https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c3d4d537337f69e405a36fa561e7292ee4148bf7

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-93824? +

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: tls: reject the combination of TLS and sockmap TLS and sockmap (BPF psock) integration hides a lot of latent bugs. Bugs which may be more or less relevant for real users but they are definitely exploitable. We could not find anyone actively using this integration so let's reject this config. Adding a TLS socket to a sockmap was already rejected by sk_psock_init() through the inet_csk_has_ulp() check. We need to reject the attempts to configure the TLS keys (rather than adding the ULP itself) because checking prior to the ULP installation is tricky without risking a race with sockmap getting added in parallel (sockmap does not hold the socket lock). This patch is a minimal rejection of the feature. Subsequent patch in the series will do a light dead code removal. Full cleanup would require a major rewrite of the Tx path, we don't need skmsg any more.

How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2026-93824? +

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.