high · 7.7

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: wireguard: noise: reject response consumption after intermediate ini…

CVE-2026-99059 · GHSA-c2jq-9mfv-9wqh · EUVD-2026-108725 · published 23 Oct 2026

How serious is it

  • Severity: high, CVSS score 7.7 out of 10.
  • No exploit prediction (EPSS) score yet.
  • Not on the CISA list of exploited vulnerabilities.
  • No public exploit in Exploit-DB.

Is your app affected by CVE-2026-99059?

Paste this prompt into Claude Code, Cursor or any AI coding tool: it runs a free Shippable scan of your project and fixes what it finds. Built with Lovable, Bolt or v0? Scan your live app. Or upload your package file.

Who is affected

  • Linux Linux: patch: 7.2.11
  • Linux Linux: e7096c131e5161fa3b8e52a650d7719d2857adfd <d0305f8d90029556260c6824b61c493c424eba9e
  • Linux Linux: e7096c131e5161fa3b8e52a650d7719d2857adfd <3bec3d32c2a3afd164fc87f95457df2cf9049c20
  • Linux Linux: patch: 7.3
  • Linux Linux: 5.6
  • Linux Linux: e7096c131e5161fa3b8e52a650d7719d2857adfd <c76a80db593096edf2b3b3972f58b6342a8c6c04
  • Linux Linux: patch: 6.18.57
  • Linux Linux: patch: 6.6.160
  • Linux Linux: patch: 0
  • Linux Linux: e7096c131e5161fa3b8e52a650d7719d2857adfd <fb5ce4c7790c3eeec820302d08d70ecf46af4295

How to check

  1. Find out whether you run the affected product and which version, then compare it with the versions above.

How to fix

Copies a prompt for Claude Code, Cursor or Codex that asks it to check whether you run this product.
  1. Apply the vendor's update or mitigation from the references below. If there is none yet, limit exposure of the affected service until there is.
  2. If a vulnerable version was live, check your logs and rotate the secrets that server could read.

The advisory

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: wireguard: noise: reject response consumption after intermediate initiation Two threads begin processing the identical response message, received twice. The first thread, A, runs. While it's running, the second one, B, gets partway through, and during that slow calculation, or even while blocking on down_write(), A completes and then also a handshake initiation that's already been queued up runs in thread C, which itself takes that same down_write(). The handshake initiation creation succeeds, and sets the state back to waiting-for-response, and calls up_write(), at which point thread B resumes, because either its finished its calculations or was finally allowed to acquire down_write(). Thread B then copies the state back to the peer, and begins a new session, using that state, which is the same session as the one made in thread A. Thread A Thread B Thread C down_read() sA = handshake->state memcpy(cA, handshake->crypto) up_read() if (sA != 1) goto fail slow_crypto(cA) down_read() sB = handshake->state memcpy(cB, handshake->crypto) up_read() if (sB != 1) goto fail slow_crypto(cB) down_write() if (sA != handshake->state) goto fail memcpy(handshake->crypto, cA) handshake->state = 2 up_write() down_write() if (handshake->state != 2) goto fail derive_session(handshake->crypto) up_write() down_write() slow_crypto(handshake->crypto) handshake->state = 1 up_write() down_write() if (sB != handshake->state) goto fail memcpy(handshake->crypto, cB) handshake->state = 2 up_write() down_write() if (handshake->state != 2) goto fail derive_session(handshake->crypto) up_write() This seems basically impossible to hit in a meaningful way in practice, but ensure that it absolutely cannot happen by comparing the ephemeral private key that's on the stack with the latest one that the peer's handshake state has.

Check your whole app

Dependencies are only half of it. Free and read-only: before you push, run npx shippable-dev scan localhost:3000 in your project folder, no account needed. For your live app, you prove it's yours with a one-line tag first.

References

Merged from ENISA EUVD. Last updated 25 Oct 2026. All vulnerabilities · RSS · JSON