UBUNTU-CVE-2026-93251 (CVE-2026-93251)

Vulnerability from osv_ubuntu – Published: 2026-09-24 16:17 – Updated: 2026-11-13 03:18 – Source website
VLAI
Details

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ACPI: bus: Introduce acpi_bus_get_primary_device() The function used for obtaining the first "physical" device for which the given ACPI one is the ACPI companion, acpi_get_first_physical_node(), may return a stale device pointer (mostly in theory) because acpi_unbind_one() may run as a whole after dropping the ACPI device's physical_node_lock in acpi_get_first_physical_node() and before it returns. The last reference to the "physical" device may be dropped then before the pointer to it is returned to the caller. If that happens and the acpi_get_first_physical_node() caller invokes get_device() on the pointer obtained from it, which is done by the majority of its callers, a use-after-free will occur. To prepare for addressing this problem, introduce a new function for getting the first "physical" device associated with the given ACPI one (the "primary physical device") that will also reference count the device in question before returning a pointer to it. Make that new function and acpi_get_first_physical_node() share the physical node list lookup code. No intentional functional impact.

Severity
N/A (UNKNOWN)
low
References
To clipboard 

Loading 1.0 MB of JSON…



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.

Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline

Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC

JSON
How durations are calculated

Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.

Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.

Loading timeline…




    Related by attack behaviour

    Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.