CVE Intelligence
High

CVE-2026-72314 — regulator: core: regulator_lock_two() should test for EDEADLK not EDEADLOCK

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: regulator: core: regulator_lock_two() should test for EDEADLK not EDEADLOCK Compare against -EDEADLK, which is what ww_mutex_lock() actually returns and what every other deadlock check in this file already uses. Function regulator_lock_two() acquires two regulators via regulator_lock_nested() -> ww_mutex_lock(). On contention, ww_mutex_lock() returns -EDEADLK, which is the caller's signal to drop the lock it holds and retry the acquisition in the canonical order. However, regulator_lock_two() tests the return value against -EDEADLOCK rather than -EDEADLK. On most architectures, EDEADLK and EDEADLOCK are the same value, so the comparison happens to be correct and the bug is invisible. But on MIPS, SPARC, and PowerPC, those two errors have different values. The test is wrong: a genuine -EDEADLK backoff no longer matches -EDEADLOCK, so instead of unlocking and retrying, the code falls into WARN_ON(ret) and returns with only one of the two regulators locked. In practice, this is a bug only on MIPS, because the regulator core is not built or used on the other two platforms. In general, EDEADLK is preferred over EDEADLOCK for new code.

Published Aug 15, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: Linux

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • Technical severity (high)+6

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
—
No EPSS score.
Affects
Linux
Linux
CVSS base
7.8
High · 2 source(s)

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (Linux Linux).
  2. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  3. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
Linux Linux version 435c65af581a61ca249bd8f717c3a147dc119f11version 6.4≥ 6.3.2 and < 6.4≥ 6.2.15 and < 6.3≥ 5.4.243 and < 5.5≥ 6.1.28 and < 6.1.178≥ 5.15.111 and < 5.15.212≥ 5.10.180 and < 5.10.261
and 10 more version cdc042430ea9e07f77ce05a9d29e227dbdecc733≥ 06140d6dfe720d80566f792b4e28a9cd60a67970 and < dc804f390fddd9c389edf0976356942e16878d8fversion 5224ea575196db11c0a909a78ea426ccdb92f064≥ cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 and < d38f8bd771c4999b797d7074b348cf201414bd34≥ cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 and < 153d1b8b5bc30847eb70ad535f62f289aa9217e6≥ cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 and < 346e2d666a29ae7233c56b356a0487eb1d42589b≥ cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 and < e2063307ea3b6da74585129ba7b588e8243e2ef0≥ cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 and < 29a7953e9adea6c7f9e64947745b79158e7cea7f≥ 849ab4cf182b38e562ffcc1b494d510e948822dd and < 0c305eac40470a224671858a215963b070f9b2a9≥ 1e3056b8067c2e9b7741c4e588f0acacbe4bdafc and < 8e39aa63798ea0a797fd9341419f12ef91df3238
Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
7.8 CVSS 3.1 High 1.8 5.9 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67 via NIST National Vulnerability Database
7.8 CVSS 3.1 High — — Linux via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H (score shown at the top: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67)

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Local/physical vector: focus on endpoint telemetry (EDR) from affected hosts.
endpoint telemetry (EDR)

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · linux/linux
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 15, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 7.8
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Received
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Aug 15, 2026 · Linux

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 15, 2026 – Oct 15, 2026

References

8 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Linux
every CVE for this vendor

Related CVEs (same products)

  • Critical CVE-2026-99999 ipv4: validate checksum_start before completing checksum 14h
  • Unknown CVE-2026-98432 ipv4: free inet_opt and ireq_opt after an RCU grace period 14h
  • Unknown CVE-2026-98424 wifi: cfg80211: undo netns switch if renaming the wiphy fails 1d
  • Unknown CVE-2026-98425 wifi: mac80211: don't warn when an IBSS has no channel to scan 1d
  • Unknown CVE-2026-98426 wifi: mwifiex: fix IRQ leak using wrong index in MSI-X error path 1d
  • Unknown CVE-2026-98427 net/sched: codel: bound the dropping loop per dequeue call 1d

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No FIRST EPSS score.
  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No CISA SSVC assessment.
  • No CWE classification.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-72314 is "regulator: core: regulator_lock_two() should test for EDEADLK not EDEADLOCK", rated High. It affects Linux (Linux); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 7.8 describes technical severity. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.