CVE-2026-31607
MEDIUMDescription
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: usbip: validate number_of_packets in usbip_pack_ret_submit() When a USB/IP client receives a RET_SUBMIT response, usbip_pack_ret_submit() unconditionally overwrites urb->number_of_packets from the network PDU. This value is subsequently used as the loop bound in usbip_recv_iso() and usbip_pad_iso() to iterate over urb->iso_frame_desc[], a flexible array whose size was fixed at URB allocation time based on the *original* number_of_packets from the CMD_SUBMIT. A malicious USB/IP server can set number_of_packets in the response to a value larger than what was originally submitted, causing a heap out-of-bounds write when usbip_recv_iso() writes to urb->iso_frame_desc[i] beyond the allocated region. KASAN confirmed this with kernel 7.0.0-rc5: BUG: KASAN: slab-out-of-bounds in usbip_recv_iso+0x46a/0x640 Write of size 4 at addr ffff888106351d40 by task vhci_rx/69 The buggy address is located 0 bytes to the right of allocated 320-byte region [ffff888106351c00, ffff888106351d40) The server side (stub_rx.c) and gadget side (vudc_rx.c) already validate number_of_packets in the CMD_SUBMIT path since commits c6688ef9f297 ("usbip: fix stub_rx: harden CMD_SUBMIT path to handle malicious input") and b78d830f0049 ("usbip: fix vudc_rx: harden CMD_SUBMIT path to handle malicious input"). The server side validates against USBIP_MAX_ISO_PACKETS because no URB exists yet at that point. On the client side we have the original URB, so we can use the tighter bound: the response must not exceed the original number_of_packets. This mirrors the existing validation of actual_length against transfer_buffer_length in usbip_recv_xbuff(), which checks the response value against the original allocation size. Kelvin Mbogo's series ("usb: usbip: fix integer overflow in usbip_recv_iso()", v2) hardens the receive-side functions themselves; this patch complements that work by catching the bad value at its source -- in usbip_pack_ret_submit() before the overwrite -- and using the tighter per-URB allocation bound rather than the global USBIP_MAX_ISO_PACKETS limit. Fix this by checking rpdu->number_of_packets against urb->number_of_packets in usbip_pack_ret_submit() before the overwrite. On violation, clamp to zero so that usbip_recv_iso() and usbip_pad_iso() safely return early.
How to fix
This vulnerability affects an unusually large number of packages. The highest-confidence fixes are shown above; the full list is longer. Check the referenced advisories for complete coverage.
TridentStack Control can deploy fixes like this automatically across your Windows, macOS, and Linux fleet. See how it works
Remediation is compiled from vendor and distribution security advisories. Always confirm against the linked source for your exact version and platform.
CVSS v3 Vector
Exploitability
Impact
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H/E:U
Exploit Intelligence
Low risk: more likely to be exploited than 23% of all known CVEs.
References
Related Vulnerabilities
Other CWE-787 (Out-of-bounds Write) vulnerabilities, ordered by exploit likelihood. View all
| CVE | Severity | CVSS | EPSS | Exploited | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-22457 | Critical | 9.0 | 100% | KEV + Ransom | Fix |
| CVE-2025-0282 | Critical | 9.0 | 100% | KEV + Ransom | - |
| CVE-2023-4863 | High | 8.8 | 100% | KEV | Fix |
| CVE-2015-3113 | Critical | 9.8 | 100% | KEV | Fix |
| CVE-2021-20038 | Critical | 9.8 | 100% | KEV + Ransom | - |
| CVE-2019-11043 | High | 8.7 | 100% | KEV + Ransom | Fix |
Common questions
How do I fix CVE-2026-31607?
Published advisories record a fix for 648 affected products. The "How to fix" section on this page lists the fixed version and source advisory for each one, so apply the entry matching what you actually run.
Is CVE-2026-31607 being actively exploited?
Not that we know of. CVE-2026-31607 is not in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. Its EPSS score of 0.31% is the estimated probability that it will be exploited in the next 30 days. That is higher than 23% of all scored CVEs.
How severe is CVE-2026-31607?
CVE-2026-31607 has a CVSS v3 base score of 7.1, rated moderate. CVSS rates the technical impact if the vulnerability is exploited, not how likely that is, so weigh it alongside the exploit-prediction score when you decide what to patch first.
What does CVE-2026-31607 affect?
Published advisories record a fix for linux (Debian), bpftool (Rocky), bpftool (Red Hat / RHEL), bpftool-debuginfo (Rocky), and 644 more. Only products with a sourced advisory are listed, so treat this as what we can cite rather than a complete inventory.
Embed a live status badge for CVE-2026-31607
Markdown
[](https://tridentstack.com/cve/CVE-2026-31607)HTML
<a href="https://tridentstack.com/cve/CVE-2026-31607"><img src="https://tridentstack.com/cve/badge/CVE-2026-31607.svg" alt="CVE-2026-31607"></a>Find and fix vulnerabilities across your fleet
TridentStack Control continuously scans your Windows, macOS, and Linux fleet for known vulnerabilities, prioritizes them by severity and active exploitation, and patches them automatically.
This product uses NVD data but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD. EPSS scores courtesy of FIRST.org (https://www.first.org/epss). Source: CISA KEV Catalog. Data as of 2026-08-21.