{"answers":{"affected":"","exploited":"There is no known exploitation of CVE-2026-99059 in the wild and no public exploit code.","fix":"Upgrade to a fixed version.","what":"CVE-2026-99059 is a high-severity vulnerability in Linux, published on 23 Oct 2026."},"fix_prompt":"Check this codebase for CVE-2026-99059 and fix it if it is affected.\n\nWhat it is: CVE-2026-99059 is a high-severity vulnerability in Linux, published on 23 Oct 2026. \nExploitation: There is no known exploitation of CVE-2026-99059 in the wild and no public exploit code.\n\nAffected product: Linux. No package-level version data is available, so check the vendor advisory linked from the reference page.\n\nTask:\n1. Search the dependency manifests and lockfiles (for example package.json, package-lock.json, requirements.txt, poetry.lock, uv.lock, pom.xml, build.gradle, go.mod, Cargo.lock, Gemfile.lock) and any Dockerfiles for the affected packages, including transitive dependencies.\n2. If an affected version is in use, upgrade it to the fixed version for its release line with the project's package manager, so the lockfile is regenerated. Prefer the smallest upgrade that fixes it.\n3. If there is no fix, or the upgrade would break the build, do not guess: explain the risk and the safest workaround instead.\n4. Run the tests and summarise what changed and why.\n5. If nothing in the project is affected, say so and change nothing.\n\nReference: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-99059/ (Markdown: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-99059/index.md)","id":"CVE-2026-99059","markdown":"https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-99059/index.md","name":"CVE-2026-99059","record":{"aliases":["AZL-110948","BELL-CVE-2026-99059","DEBIAN-CVE-2026-99059","GHSA-c2jq-9mfv-9wqh","UBUNTU-CVE-2026-99059"],"analysis":null,"analysis_generated_by":null,"assigner":"Linux","cpe":[],"cvss":{"score":7.7,"severity":"high","source":"cna","vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L","version":"3.1"},"cwes":[],"description":"In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nwireguard: noise: reject response consumption after intermediate initiation\n\nTwo threads begin processing the identical response message, received\ntwice. The first thread, A, runs. While it's running, the second one,\nB, gets partway through, and during that slow calculation, or even while\nblocking on down_write(), A completes and then also a handshake\ninitiation that's already been queued up runs in thread C, which itself\ntakes that same down_write(). The handshake initiation creation\nsucceeds, and sets the state back to waiting-for-response, and calls\nup_write(), at which point thread B resumes, because either its finished\nits calculations or was finally allowed to acquire down_write(). Thread\nB then copies the state back to the peer, and begins a new session,\nusing that state, which is the same session as the one made in thread A.\n\nThread A\t\t\tThread B\t\t\tThread C\n\ndown_read()\n sA = handshake-\u003estate\n memcpy(cA, handshake-\u003ecrypto)\nup_read()\nif (sA != 1)\n goto fail\nslow_crypto(cA)\n\t\t\t\tdown_read()\n\t\t\t\t sB = handshake-\u003estate\n\t\t\t\t memcpy(cB, handshake-\u003ecrypto)\n\t\t\t\tup_read()\n\t\t\t\tif (sB != 1)\n\t\t\t\t goto fail\n\t\t\t\tslow_crypto(cB)\ndown_write()\n if (sA != handshake-\u003estate)\n  goto fail\n memcpy(handshake-\u003ecrypto, cA)\n handshake-\u003estate = 2\nup_write()\ndown_write()\n if (handshake-\u003estate != 2)\n  goto fail\n derive_session(handshake-\u003ecrypto)\nup_write()\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tdown_write()\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t slow_crypto(handshake-\u003ecrypto)\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t handshake-\u003estate = 1\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tup_write()\n\t\t\t\tdown_write()\n\t\t\t\t if (sB != handshake-\u003estate)\n\t\t\t\t   goto fail\n\t\t\t\t memcpy(handshake-\u003ecrypto, cB)\n\t\t\t\t handshake-\u003estate = 2\n\t\t\t\tup_write()\n\t\t\t\tdown_write()\n\t\t\t\t if (handshake-\u003estate != 2)\n\t\t\t\t  goto fail\n\t\t\t\t derive_session(handshake-\u003ecrypto)\n\t\t\t\tup_write()\n\nThis seems basically impossible to hit in a meaningful way in practice,\nbut ensure that it absolutely cannot happen by comparing the ephemeral\nprivate key that's on the stack with the latest one that the peer's\nhandshake state has.","ecosystems":[],"exploits":{"exploitdb":0,"first_seen":null,"github_poc":0,"max_poc_stars":null,"metasploit":0,"nuclei":0,"refs":[],"tier":"none_known"},"has_fix":true,"headline":"wireguard: noise: reject response consumption after intermediate initiation","id":"CVE-2026-99059","indexable":true,"kev":null,"kind":"cve","links":{"ecosystem":null,"product":null,"products":[],"type":null,"year":"2026"},"n_packages":0,"n_references":5,"next":{"headline":"wifi: mt76: mt7603: initialize global station WCID","id":"CVE-2026-99060"},"packages":[],"prev":{"headline":"workqueue: Fix NULL current_pwq deref in chained work check","id":"CVE-2026-99058"},"products":["Linux"],"published":"2026-10-23","related":[],"sources":[{"class":"attribution","licence":"CVE Terms of Use (MITRE)","name":"CVE List","prefix":"CVE"},{"class":"attribution","licence":"FIRST CVSS licence","name":"CVSS (FIRST)"}],"ssvc":{"automatable":null,"exploitation":null,"technical_impact":null},"state":"PUBLISHED","updated":"2026-10-24","vendors":["Linux"]},"summary":null,"url":"https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-99059/"}