CVE Intelligence
Unknown

CVE-2026-93243 — mm/secretmem: properly account locked pages

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/secretmem: properly account locked pages secretmem accounts folios by treating memory as if it were mlock()'d and thus limited by the RLIMIT_MEMLOCK limit. However the folios are unevictable and remain so until the inode is evicted, eliminating usual mlock() semantics - mapping folios then unmapping them does not clear their unevictable state, since it depends on AS_UNEVICTABLE, not PG_mlocked. A user can therefore easily work around the RLIMIT_MEMLOCK limit - simply map then unmap and VmLck no longer counts the secretmem range. Worse, folios are not accounted in the process's RSS, meaning the OOM killer won't know to kill the process. Repeatedly mapping/unmapping (or forking) can then result in the consumption of all available system memory with unevictable folios and cause system instability. A secretmem fd can be passed between processes and over fork so a per-process limit simply does not make sense, so follow the precedent set by io_uring, perf, skbuff, iommufd and xdp by tracking the number of locked pages in user_struct->locked_vm. Since the scope tracked is actually inode lifetime, the RLIMIT_MEMLOCK applies per-user not per-process, so it doesn't make sense to bypass for users with CAP_IPC_LOCK, therefore remove this bypass. There is simply no reason to carry on marking the mapping as mlock()'d since it's misleading and the lifecycle is now correctly handled, so remove this too. Note that secretmem does not support any form of truncation (including hole punching) and the folios are unreclaimable, so the folios need only be accounted on fault and unaccounted on inode destruction. __secretmem_account_pages() is more or less a duplicate of the code that io_uring etc. use, but since this is a bug fix that needs backporting, defer any de-duplication efforts to a follow-up. test_mlock_limit() asserts mlock_future_ok() on mmap(), however this has been removed, so remove the test altogether for the fix. A new test will be sent separately for upstream.

Published Sep 24, 2026 · Updated Oct 15, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP, GitHub Security Advisories · 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
  • EPSS 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+2

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
0.23%
ahead of 13% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026
Affects
Linux
Linux
CVSS base
—
Score not published yet.

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 ≥ 1507f51255c9ff07d75909a84e7c0d7f3c4b2f49 and < a41c95ac90f285cbe473b9606428b14518896ea4≥ 1507f51255c9ff07d75909a84e7c0d7f3c4b2f49 and < 853043cb129473ff2fa0090602be944d96b9d5c9≥ 1507f51255c9ff07d75909a84e7c0d7f3c4b2f49 and < 3b4f72bdddff69819d665395376329ef21f37a06≥ 1507f51255c9ff07d75909a84e7c0d7f3c4b2f49 and < 97d34aa65c29cca85e3e9050f4c936389b38a054version 5.14 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP

Detection

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

  • Not enough vector or weakness data: use the affected application’s logs as a starting point.
application logs

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Record published
    Oct 15, 2026
  • Affected products added · linux/linux
    Oct 15, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Source status changed · → Received
    Oct 15, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 15, 2026 · Alertas do Telegram
  • CVE published
    Sep 24, 2026 · Linux

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

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

References

6 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 9h
  • Unknown CVE-2026-98432 ipv4: free inet_opt and ireq_opt after an RCU grace period 9h
  • Unknown CVE-2026-98430 RDMA/efa: Keep admin queues alive while IRQ is registered 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
  • Unknown CVE-2026-98428 ALSA: usb: 6fire: Avoid embedded URBs 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 CVSS score published by NVD, the CNA, CISA or GitHub so far.
  • 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-2026-93243 is "mm/secretmem: properly account locked pages", rated Unknown. It affects Linux (Linux); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. EPSS 0.23% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. 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.