Linux/Unix 主機上安裝了一個或多個受到弱點影響的套件，且廠商未提供可用的修補程式。

  - net：gro：正確驗證 BIG TCP 聚合標準 當 GRO 嘗試聚合超過 GRO_LEGACY_MAX_SIZE （64KB） 的封包時，僅允許普通 IPv4 TCP 和普通 IPv6 TCP 使用 BIG TCP（有足夠的 MAC 標頭空間來插入臨時 HBH 巨型標頭）。不過，請提交 b1a78b9b9886 （net：
    新增對 IPv4 大 TCP 的支援） 放寬了 skb_gro_receive（） 中的檢查，導致了幾個問題： 1.
    skb_gro_receive（） 檢查了 skb_headroom（p），而不是 MAC 標頭 （p->mac_header） 之前的實際空格。由於 skb_headroom（p） 包含 mac_len，因此特製的幀（例如透過 AF_PACKET 插入）可以通過 p->mac_header < 8 位元組的檢查。當 ipv6_gro_complete（） 插入臨時 HBH 巨型標頭時，memmove（） 會在 skb->head 之前啟動，導致越界寫入並包裝 skb->mac_header。2. 它允許軟體 VLAN （ETH_P_8021Q / ETH_P_8021AD） 等非 IP 協定聚合超過 64KB，因為 p->protocol ！= ETH_P_IPV6 為 true。3. 它檢查了 p->encapsulation 而不是 NAPI_GRO_CB（skb）->encap_mark，允許封裝流量（例如 SIT / IPv6-in-IPv4）聚合超過 64KB。修正 skb_gro_receive（） 以嚴格執行： - NAPI_GRO_CB（skb）->proto == IPPROTO_TCP - 未封裝 （！NAPI_GRO_CB（skb）->encap_mark &&; ！p->encapsulation） - 通訊協定必須是 ETH_P_IP 或 ETH_P_IPV6 - 如果ETH_P_IPV6，p->mac_header 必須至少是 sizeof（struct hop_jumbo_hdr） 從 skb_gro_receive（） 傳回 -E2BIG 可確保無法成為 BIG TCP 的封包在 <= 64KB 時被乾淨地排清，並完整地傳遞而不會丟棄。主線 （7.0+） 中不存在此問題，因為子系統已在提交 81be30c1f5f2 中重寫 （net/ipv6：刪除 RX 端 BIG TCP 的 HBH），因此此修正僅適用於較舊的穩定分支，例如 6.18.y。CVE-2026-80725

請注意，Nessus 的判定取決於廠商所報告的套件是否存在。

AlmaLinux 9.2 主機已安裝的套件會受到 TuxCare ALMALINUX9.2：CLSA-2026：1789898700 公告中提及的多個弱點影響。

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：ceph: fix possible deadlock when holding Fwb to get inline_data 1, mount with wsync. 2, create a file with O_RDWR, and the request was sent to mds.0: ceph_atomic_open()--> ceph_mdsc_do_request(openc) finish_open(file, dentry, ceph_open)--> ceph_open()--> ceph_init_file()--> ceph_init_file_info()--> ceph_uninline_data()--> { ... if (inline_version == 1 || /* initial version, no data */ inline_version == CEPH_INLINE_NONE) goto out_unlock; ... } The inline_version will be 1, which is the initial version for the new create file. And here the ci->i_inline_version will keep with 1, it's buggy. 3, buffer write to the file immediately:
    ceph_write_iter()--> ceph_get_caps(file, need=Fw, want=Fb, ...); generic_perform_write()--> a_ops->write_begin()--> ceph_write_begin()--> netfs_write_begin()--> netfs_begin_read()--> netfs_rreq_submit_slice()--> netfs_read_from_server()--> rreq->netfs_ops->issue_read()--> ceph_netfs_issue_read()--> { ... if (ci->i_inline_version != CEPH_INLINE_NONE && ceph_netfs_issue_op_inline(subreq)) return; ... } ceph_put_cap_refs(ci, Fwb); The ceph_netfs_issue_op_inline() will send a getattr(Fsr) request to mds.1. 4, then the mds.1 will request the rd lock for CInode::filelock from the auth mds.0, the mds.0 will do the CInode::filelock state transation from excl --> sync, but it need to revoke the Fxwb caps back from the clients. While the kernel client has aleady held the Fwb caps and waiting for the getattr(Fsr). It's deadlock! URL:
    https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/55377 (CVE-2022-49296)

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：tracing: Fix reading strings from synthetic events The follow commands caused a crash: # cd /sys/kernel/tracing # echo 's:open char file[]' > dynamic_events # echo 'hist:keys=common_pid:file=filename:onchange($file).trace(open,$file)' > events/syscalls/sys_enter_openat/trigger' # echo 1 > events/synthetic/open/enable BOOM! The problem is that the synthetic event field char file[] will read the value given to it as a string without any memory checks to make sure the address is valid. The above example will pass in the user space address and the sythetic event code will happily call strlen() on it and then strscpy() where either one will cause an oops when accessing user space addresses. Use the helper functions from trace_kprobe and trace_eprobe that can read strings safely (and actually succeed when the address is from user space and the memory is mapped in). Now the above can show: packagekitd-1721 [000] ...2. 104.597170: open:
    file=/usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/cmake.attr in:imjournal-978 [006] ...2. 104.599642: open:
    file=/var/lib/rsyslog/imjournal.state.tmp packagekitd-1721 [000] ...2. 104.626308: open:
    file=/usr/lib/rpm/fileattrs/debuginfo.attr (CVE-2022-50255)

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：hwrng: core - Fix page fault dead lock on mmap-ed hwrng There is a dead-lock in the hwrng device read path. This triggers when the user reads from /dev/hwrng into memory also mmap-ed from /dev/hwrng. The resulting page fault triggers a recursive read which then dead-locks. Fix this by using a stack buffer when calling copy_to_user. (CVE-2023-52615)

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：fscache: Use wait_on_bit() to wait for the freeing of relinquished volume The freeing of relinquished volume will wake up the pending volume acquisition by using wake_up_bit(), however it is mismatched with wait_var_event() used in fscache_wait_on_volume_collision() and it will never wake up the waiter in the wait-queue because these two functions operate on different wait-queues. According to the implementation in fscache_wait_on_volume_collision(), if the wake-up of pending acquisition is delayed longer than 20 seconds (e.g., due to the delay of on-demand fd closing), the first wait_var_event_timeout() will timeout and the following wait_var_event() will hang forever as shown below: FS-Cache: Potential volume collision new=00000024 old=00000022 ...... INFO: task mount:1148 blocked for more than 122 seconds. Not tainted 6.1.0-rc6+ #1 task:mount state:D stack:0 pid:1148 ppid:1 Call Trace: <TASK> __schedule+0x2f6/0xb80 schedule+0x67/0xe0 fscache_wait_on_volume_collision.cold+0x80/0x82 __fscache_acquire_volume+0x40d/0x4e0 erofs_fscache_register_volume+0x51/0xe0 [erofs] erofs_fscache_register_fs+0x19c/0x240 [erofs] erofs_fc_fill_super+0x746/0xaf0 [erofs] vfs_get_super+0x7d/0x100 get_tree_nodev+0x16/0x20 erofs_fc_get_tree+0x20/0x30 [erofs] vfs_get_tree+0x24/0xb0 path_mount+0x2fa/0xa90 do_mount+0x7c/0xa0
    __x64_sys_mount+0x8b/0xe0 do_syscall_64+0x30/0x60 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x46/0xb0 Considering that wake_up_bit() is more selective, so fix it by using wait_on_bit() instead of wait_var_event() to wait for the freeing of relinquished volume. In addition because waitqueue_active() is used in wake_up_bit() and clear_bit() doesn't imply any memory barrier, use clear_and_wake_up_bit() to add the missing memory barrier between cursor->flags and waitqueue_active(). (CVE-2023-52982)

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：Bluetooth: ISO: fix iso_conn related locking and validity issues sk->sk_state indicates whether iso_pi(sk)->conn is valid. Operations that check/update sk_state and access conn should hold lock_sock, otherwise they can race. The order of taking locks is hci_dev_lock > lock_sock > iso_conn_lock, which is how it is in connect/disconnect_cfm -> iso_conn_del -> iso_chan_del. Fix locking in iso_connect_cis/bis and sendmsg/recvmsg to take lock_sock around updating sk_state and conn. iso_conn_del must not occur during iso_connect_cis/bis, as it frees the iso_conn. Hold hdev->lock longer to prevent that. This should not reintroduce the issue fixed in commit 241f51931c35 (Bluetooth: ISO: Avoid circular locking dependency), since the we acquire locks in order.
    We retain the fix in iso_sock_connect to release lock_sock before iso_connect_* acquires hdev->lock.
    Similarly for commit 6a5ad251b7cd (Bluetooth: ISO: Fix possible circular locking dependency). We retain the fix in iso_conn_ready to not acquire iso_conn_lock before lock_sock. iso_conn_add shall return iso_conn with valid hcon. Make it so also when reusing an old CIS connection waiting for disconnect timeout (see __iso_sock_close where conn->hcon is set to NULL). Trace with iso_conn_del after iso_chan_add in iso_connect_cis: =============================================================== iso_sock_create:771:
    sock 00000000be9b69b7 iso_sock_init:693: sk 000000004dff667e iso_sock_bind:827: sk 000000004dff667e 70:1a:b8:98:ff:a2 type 1 iso_sock_setsockopt:1289: sk 000000004dff667e iso_sock_setsockopt:1289: sk 000000004dff667e iso_sock_setsockopt:1289: sk 000000004dff667e iso_sock_connect:875: sk 000000004dff667e iso_connect_cis:353: 70:1a:b8:98:ff:a2 -> 28:3d:c2:4a:7e:da hci_get_route:1199: 70:1a:b8:98:ff:a2 -> 28:3d:c2:4a:7e:da hci_conn_add:1005: hci0 dst 28:3d:c2:4a:7e:da iso_conn_add:140: hcon 000000007b65d182 conn 00000000daf8625e __iso_chan_add:214: conn 00000000daf8625e iso_connect_cfm:1700: hcon 000000007b65d182 bdaddr 28:3d:c2:4a:7e:da status 12 iso_conn_del:187: hcon 000000007b65d182 conn 00000000daf8625e, err 16 iso_sock_clear_timer:117: sock 000000004dff667e state 3 <Note: sk_state is BT_BOUND (3), so iso_connect_cis is still running at this point> iso_chan_del:153: sk 000000004dff667e, conn 00000000daf8625e, err 16 hci_conn_del:1151: hci0 hcon 000000007b65d182 handle 65535 hci_conn_unlink:1102: hci0: hcon 000000007b65d182 hci_chan_list_flush:2780: hcon 000000007b65d182 iso_sock_getsockopt:1376: sk 000000004dff667e iso_sock_getname:1070: sock 00000000be9b69b7, sk 000000004dff667e iso_sock_getname:1070: sock 00000000be9b69b7, sk 000000004dff667e iso_sock_getsockopt:1376: sk 000000004dff667e iso_sock_getname:1070: sock 00000000be9b69b7, sk 000000004dff667e iso_sock_getname:1070: sock 00000000be9b69b7, sk 000000004dff667e iso_sock_shutdown:1434:
    sock 00000000be9b69b7, sk 000000004dff667e, how 1 __iso_sock_close:632: sk 000000004dff667e state 5 socket 00000000be9b69b7 <Note: sk_state is BT_CONNECT (5), even though iso_chan_del sets BT_CLOSED (6). Only iso_connect_cis sets it to BT_CONNECT, so it must be that iso_chan_del occurred between iso_chan_add and end of iso_connect_cis.> BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000 PGD 8000000006467067 P4D 8000000006467067 PUD 3f5f067 PMD 0 Oops: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP PTI Hardware name:
    QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.2-1.fc38 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:__iso_sock_close (net/bluetooth/iso.c:664) bluetooth =============================================================== Trace with iso_conn_del before iso_chan_add in iso_connect_cis:
    =============================================================== iso_connect_cis:356: 70:1a:b8:98:ff:a2 -> 28:3d:c2:4a:7e:da ... iso_conn_add:140: hcon 0000000093bc551f conn 00000000768ae504 hci_dev_put:1487: hci0 orig refcnt 21 hci_event_packet:7607: hci0: e ---truncated--- (CVE-2023-54164)

請注意，Nessus 並未測試這些問題，而是僅依據應用程式自我報告的版本號碼作出判斷。

遠端 Debian 12 主機安裝的套件會受到 dla-4777 公告中提及的多個弱點影響。

    - Bonaccorso debian-lts@lists.debian.org------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://www.debian.org/lts/security/Salvatore Debian LTS 公告 DLA-4777-1 2026 年 9 月 8 日https://wiki.debian.org/LTS
    - -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    套件：linux 版本： 6.1.187-1 CVE ID： CVE-2023-53706 CVE-2023-54141 CVE-2023-54263 CVE-2024-38620 CVE-2024-46754 CVE-2024-58094 CVE-2024-58095 CVE-2025-22104 CVE-2025-38117 CVE-2025-38203 CVE-2025-38206 CVE-2025-38237 CVE-2025-38616 CVE-2025-39833 CVE-2025-39901 CVE-2025-39925 CVE-2025-40054 CVE-2025-40064 CVE-2025-40102 CVE-2025-40139 CVE-2025-40168 CVE-2025-40206 CVE-2025-40307 CVE-2025-68794 CVE-2026-23394 CVE-2026-31419 CVE-2026-43491 CVE-2026-45963 CVE-2026-46111 CVE-2026-46158 CVE-2026-46170 CVE-2026-46266 CVE-2026-53089 CVE-2026-53090 CVE-2026-53361 CVE-2026-64082 CVE-2026-64139 CVE-2026-64192 CVE-2026-64270 CVE-2026-64272 CVE-2026-64280 CVE-2026-64294 CVE-2026-64434 CVE-2026-64507 CVE-2026-64508 CVE-2026-64542 CVE-2026-64543 CVE-2026-64561 CVE-2026-64562 CVE-2026-64563 CVE-2026-64564 CVE-2026-64565 CVE-2026-64567 CVE-2026-64569 CVE-2026-64571 CVE-2026-64572 CVE-2026-64573 CVE-2026-64576 CVE-2026-64577 CVE-2026-64578 CVE-2026-64579 CVE-2026-64580 CVE-2026-64581 CVE-2026-64582 CVE-2026-64583 CVE-2026-64584 CVE-2026-64586 CVE-2026-64590 CVE-2026-68082 CVE-2026-68093 CVE-2026-68096 CVE-2026-68099 CVE-2026-68100 CVE-2026-68104 CVE-2026-68106 CVE-2026-68108 CVE-2026-68111 CVE-2026-68115 CVE-2026-68117 CVE-2026-68121 CVE-2026-68123 CVE-2026-68124 CVE-2026-68125 CVE-2026-68127 CVE-2026-68129 CVE-2026-68130 CVE-2026-68131 CVE-2026-68132 CVE-2026-68135 CVE-2026-68136 CVE-2026-68137 CVE-2026-68138 CVE-2026-68140 CVE-2026-68141 CVE-2026-68142 CVE-2026-68143 CVE-2026-68144 CVE-2026-68146 CVE-2026-68147 CVE-2026-68148 CVE-2026-68151 CVE-2026-68153 CVE-2026-68154 CVE-2026-68155 CVE-2026-68156 CVE-2026-68157 CVE-2026-68158 CVE-2026-68159 CVE-2026-68160 CVE-2026-68162 CVE-2026-68164 CVE-2026-68165 CVE-2026-68169 CVE-2026-68175 CVE-2026-68176 CVE-2026-68180 CVE-2026-68181 CVE-2026-68182 CVE-2026-68183 CVE-2026-68184 CVE-2026-68186 CVE-2026-68187 CVE-2026-68188 CVE-2026-68189 CVE-2026-68190 CVE-2026-68192 CVE-2026-68194 CVE-2026-68195 CVE-2026-68196 CVE-2026-68197 CVE-2026-68198 CVE-2026-68199 CVE-2026-68202 CVE-2026-68204 CVE-2026-68206 CVE-2026-68207 CVE-2026-68209 CVE-2026-68210 CVE-2026-68212 CVE-2026-68213 CVE-2026-68214 CVE-2026-68215 CVE-2026-68216 CVE-2026-68217 CVE-2026-68218 CVE-2026-68222 CVE-2026-68223 CVE-2026-68226 CVE-2026-68227 CVE-2026-68229 CVE-2026-68231 CVE-2026-68234 CVE-2026-68243 CVE-2026-68244 CVE-2026-68246 CVE-2026-68248 CVE-2026-68249 CVE-2026-68250 CVE-2026-68251 CVE-2026-68253 CVE-2026-68254 CVE-2026-68255 CVE-2026-68259 CVE-2026-68269 CVE-2026-68277 CVE-2026-68278 CVE-2026-68279 CVE-2026-68280 CVE-2026-68284 CVE-2026-68294 CVE-2026-68297 CVE-2026-68299 CVE-2026-68300 CVE-2026-68301 CVE-2026-68302 CVE-2026-68304 CVE-2026-68309 CVE-2026-68310 CVE-2026-68313 CVE-2026-68315 CVE-2026-68320 CVE-2026-68322 CVE-2026-68324 CVE-2026-68325 CVE-2026-68326 CVE-2026-68327 CVE-2026-68328 CVE-2026-68331 CVE-2026-68333 CVE-2026-68335 CVE-2026-68336 CVE-2026-68338 CVE-2026-68340 CVE-2026-68343 CVE-2026-68344 CVE-2026-68349 CVE-2026-68350 CVE-2026-68351 CVE-2026-68352 CVE-2026-68353 CVE-2026-68354 CVE-2026-68355 CVE-2026-68357 CVE-2026-68359 CVE-2026-68360 CVE-2026-68361 CVE-2026-68362 CVE-2026-68363 CVE-2026-68365 CVE-2026-68366 CVE-2026-68367 CVE-2026-68368 CVE-2026-68369 CVE-2026-68370 CVE-2026-68371 CVE-2026-68373 CVE-2026-68376 CVE-2026-68377 CVE-2026-68386 CVE-2026-68388 CVE-2026-68395 CVE-2026-68397 CVE-2026-68398 CVE-2026-68402 CVE-2026-68403 CVE-2026-68405 CVE-2026-68406 CVE-2026-68407 CVE-2026-68410 CVE-2026-68411 CVE-2026-68413 CVE-2026-68414 CVE-2026-68417 CVE-2026-68422 CVE-2026-68425 CVE-2026-68427 CVE-2026-68428 CVE-2026-68430 CVE-2026-68431 CVE-2026-68432 CVE-2026-68433 CVE-2026-68434 CVE-2026-68444 CVE-2026-68446 CVE-2026-68450 CVE-2026-68451 CVE-2026-68452 CVE-2026-68476 CVE-2026-68480 CVE-2026-72012 CVE-2026-72015 CVE-2026-72017 CVE-2026-72023 CVE-2026-72030 CVE-2026-72035 CVE-2026-72040 CVE-2026-72041 CVE-2026-72045 CVE-2026-72051 CVE-2026-72057 CVE-2026-72062 CVE-2026-72063 CVE-2026-72065 CVE-2026-72069 CVE-2026-72070 CVE-2026-72077 CVE-2026-72096 CVE-2026-72099 CVE-2026-72110 CVE-2026-72113 CVE-2026-72114 CVE-2026-72115 CVE-2026-72116 CVE-2026-72117 CVE-2026-72118 CVE-2026-72119 CVE-2026-72121 CVE-2026-72124 CVE-2026-72125 CVE-2026-72142 CVE-2026-72146 CVE-2026-72157 CVE-2026-72170 CVE-2026-72172 CVE-2026-72191 CVE-2026-72216 CVE-2026-72236 CVE-2026-72237 CVE-2026-72242 CVE-2026-72252 CVE-2026-72253 CVE-2026-72260 CVE-2026-72262 CVE-2026-72299 CVE-2026-72305 CVE-2026-72308 CVE-2026-72323 CVE-2026-72392 CVE-2026-74436 CVE-2026-74441 CVE-2026-74443 CVE-2026-74444 CVE-2026-74446 CVE-2026-74450 CVE-2026-74453 CVE-2026-74454 CVE-2026-74455 CVE-2026-74456 CVE-2026-74457 CVE-2026-74458 CVE-2026-74459 CVE-2026-74460 CVE-2026-74461 CVE-2026-74463 CVE-2026-74464 CVE-2026-74465 CVE-2026-74467 CVE-2026-74468 CVE-2026-74469 CVE-2026-74470 CVE-2026-74471 CVE-2026-74472 CVE-2026-74473 CVE-2026-74475 CVE-2026-74476 CVE-2026-74478 CVE-2026-74479 CVE-2026-74480 CVE-2026-74481 CVE-2026-74482 CVE-2026-74485 CVE-2026-74487 CVE-2026-74488 CVE-2026-74490 CVE-2026-74492 CVE-2026-74493 CVE-2026-74494 CVE-2026-74495 CVE-2026-74497 CVE-2026-74498 CVE-2026-74499 CVE-2026-74505 CVE-2026-74507 CVE-2026-74508 CVE-2026-74509 CVE-2026-74510 CVE-2026-74512 CVE-2026-74514 CVE-2026-74515 CVE-2026-74516 CVE-2026-74518 CVE-2026-74519 CVE-2026-74522 CVE-2026-74523 CVE-2026-74525 CVE-2026-74540 CVE-2026-74546 CVE-2026-74547 CVE-2026-74548 CVE-2026-74549 CVE-2026-74550 CVE-2026-74551 CVE-2026-74552 CVE-2026-74553 CVE-2026-74555 CVE-2026-74556 CVE-2026-74557 CVE-2026-74563 CVE-2026-74564 CVE-2026-74566 CVE-2026-74567 CVE-2026-74569 CVE-2026-74575 CVE-2026-74577 CVE-2026-74579 CVE-2026-74580 CVE-2026-74581 CVE-2026-74582 CVE-2026-74583 CVE-2026-74585 CVE-2026-74586 CVE-2026-74587 CVE-2026-74588 CVE-2026-74589 CVE-2026-74594 CVE-2026-74595 CVE-2026-74597 CVE-2026-74598 CVE-2026-74601 CVE-2026-74603 CVE-2026-74604 CVE-2026-74607 CVE-2026-74608 CVE-2026-74609 CVE-2026-74612 CVE-2026-74613 CVE-2026-74614 CVE-2026-74615 CVE-2026-74616 CVE-2026-74620 CVE-2026-74621 CVE-2026-74622 CVE-2026-74623 CVE-2026-74624 CVE-2026-74625 CVE-2026-74626 CVE-2026-74628 CVE-2026-74630 CVE-2026-74631 CVE-2026-74632 CVE-2026-74635 CVE-2026-74636 CVE-2026-74637 CVE-2026-74641 CVE-2026-74647 CVE-2026-74648 CVE-2026-74649 CVE-2026-74650 CVE-2026-74651 CVE-2026-74654 CVE-2026-74656 CVE-2026-74657 CVE-2026-74658 CVE-2026-74659 CVE-2026-74660 CVE-2026-74662 CVE-2026-74663 CVE-2026-74664 CVE-2026-74666 CVE-2026-74667 CVE-2026-74668 CVE-2026-74669 CVE-2026-74671 CVE-2026-74672 CVE-2026-74673 CVE-2026-74675 CVE-2026-74676 CVE-2026-74678 CVE-2026-74679 CVE-2026-74680 CVE-2026-74682 CVE-2026-74683 CVE-2026-74688 CVE-2026-74689 CVE-2026-74691 CVE-2026-74692 CVE-2026-74693 CVE-2026-74694 CVE-2026-74696 CVE-2026-74697 CVE-2026-74701 CVE-2026-74704 CVE-2026-74705 CVE-2026-74714 CVE-2026-74717 CVE-2026-74719 CVE-2026-74720 CVE-2026-74722 CVE-2026-74724 CVE-2026-74726 CVE-2026-74730 CVE-2026-74737 CVE-2026-74739 CVE-2026-74743 CVE-2026-74744 CVE-2026-74746 CVE-2026-74748 CVE-2026-80527 CVE-2026-80528 CVE-2026-80529 CVE-2026-80534 CVE-2026-80536 CVE-2026-80539 CVE-2026-80540 CVE-2026-80541 CVE-2026-80547 CVE-2026-80548 CVE-2026-80549 CVE-2026-80550 CVE-2026-80552 CVE-2026-80553 CVE-2026-80555 CVE-2026-80557 CVE-2026-80558 CVE-2026-80559 CVE-2026-80560 CVE-2026-80561 CVE-2026-80562 CVE-2026-80565 CVE-2026-80567 CVE-2026-80568 CVE-2026-80569 CVE-2026-80570 CVE-2026-80572 CVE-2026-80573 CVE-2026-80574 CVE-2026-80583 CVE-2026-80584 CVE-2026-80586 CVE-2026-80589 CVE-2026-80590 CVE-2026-80678 CVE-2026-80679 CVE-2026-80680 CVE-2026-80681 CVE-2026-80684 CVE-2026-80686 CVE-2026-80706 CVE-2026-80707 CVE-2026-80708 CVE-2026-80709 CVE-2026-80714 CVE-2026-80715 CVE-2026-80716 CVE-2026-80717 CVE-2026-80718 CVE-2026-80722 CVE-2026-80725 CVE-2026-80726 CVE-2026-80730 CVE-2026-80731 CVE-2026-80732 CVE-2026-80733 CVE-2026-80737 CVE-2026-80742 CVE-2026-80743 CVE-2026-80744 CVE-2026-80752 CVE-2026-80754 CVE-2026-80756 CVE-2026-80757 CVE-2026-80762 CVE-2026-80763 CVE-2026-80764 CVE-2026-80765 CVE-2026-80766 CVE-2026-80767 CVE-2026-80768 CVE-2026-80770 CVE-2026-80772 CVE-2026-80781 CVE-2026-80782 CVE-2026-80783 CVE-2026-80784 CVE-2026-80788 CVE-2026-80789 CVE-2026-80790 CVE-2026-80791 CVE-2026-80792 CVE-2026-80793 CVE-2026-80794 CVE-2026-80795 CVE-2026-80796 CVE-2026-80797 CVE-2026-80798 CVE-2026-80799 CVE-2026-80800 CVE-2026-80801 CVE-2026-80802 CVE-2026-80803 CVE-2026-80805 CVE-2026-80806 CVE-2026-80807 CVE-2026-80808 CVE-2026-80809 CVE-2026-80812 CVE-2026-80814 CVE-2026-80819 CVE-2026-80823 CVE-2026-80824 CVE-2026-80826 CVE-2026-80827 CVE-2026-80828 CVE-2026-80829 CVE-2026-80830 CVE-2026-80831 CVE-2026-80832 CVE-2026-80840 CVE-2026-80842 CVE-2026-80843 CVE-2026-80844 CVE-2026-80846 CVE-2026-80848 CVE-2026-80852 CVE-2026-80854 CVE-2026-80855 CVE-2026-80856 CVE-2026-80863 CVE-2026-80888 CVE-2026-80890 CVE-2026-80891 CVE-2026-80892 CVE-2026-80893 CVE-2026-80901 CVE-2026-80902 CVE-2026-80904 CVE-2026-80906 CVE-2026-80908 CVE-2026-80909 CVE-2026-80910 CVE-2026-80913

    在 Linux 核心中發現數個弱點，這些弱點可能會導致特權提升、拒絕服務或資訊洩漏。

    對於 Debian 12 書蟲來說，這些問題已經在版本 6.1.187-1中修復了。

    建議您升級 linux 套件。

    如需有關 linux 安全性狀態的詳細資訊，請參閱其安全追蹤頁面：
    https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/linux

    有關 Debian LTS 安全公告、如何將這些更新套用至您的系統以及常見問題的詳細資訊，請參閱 : https://wiki.debian.org/LTS

Tenable 已直接從 Debian 安全公告擷取前置描述區塊。

請注意，Nessus 並未測試這些問題，而是僅依據應用程式自我報告的版本號碼作出判斷。

AlmaLinux 9.6 主機已安裝的套件會受到 TuxCare ALMALINUX9.6：CLSA-2026：1792445930 公告中提及的多個弱點影響。

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：virt: tdx-guest: Just leak decrypted memory on unrecoverable errors In CoCo VMs it is possible for the untrusted host to cause set_memory_decrypted() to fail such that an error is returned and the resulting memory is shared. Callers need to take care to handle these errors to avoid returning decrypted (shared) memory to the page allocator, which could lead to functional or security issues. Leak the decrypted memory when set_memory_decrypted() fails, and don't need to print an error since set_memory_decrypted() will call WARN_ONCE(). (CVE-2024-57793)

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：crypto: af_alg - zero initialize memory allocated via sock_kmalloc Several crypto user API contexts and requests allocated with sock_kmalloc() were left uninitialized, relying on callers to set fields explicitly. This resulted in the use of uninitialized data in certain error paths or when new fields are added in the future. The ACVP patches also contain two user-space interface files: algif_kpp.c and algif_akcipher.c. These too rely on proper initialization of their context structures. A particular issue has been observed with the newly added 'inflight' variable introduced in af_alg_ctx by commit: 67b164a871af (crypto: af_alg - Disallow multiple in-flight AIO requests) Because the context is not memset to zero after allocation, the inflight variable has contained garbage values. As a result, af_alg_alloc_areq() has incorrectly returned -EBUSY randomly when the garbage value was interpreted as true:
    https://github.com/gregkh/linux/blame/master/crypto/af_alg.c#L1209 The check directly tests ctx->inflight without explicitly comparing against true/false. Since inflight is only ever set to true or false later, an uninitialized value has triggered -EBUSY failures. Zero-initializing memory allocated with sock_kmalloc() ensures inflight and other fields start in a known state, removing random issues caused by uninitialized data. (CVE-2025-71113)

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：rxrpc: proc: size address buffers for %pISpc output The AF_RXRPC procfs helpers format local and remote socket addresses into fixed 50-byte stack buffers with %pISpc. That is too small for the longest current-tree IPv6-with-port form the formatter can produce. In lib/vsprintf.c, the compressed IPv6 path uses a dotted-quad tail not only for v4mapped addresses, but also for ISATAP addresses via ipv6_addr_is_isatap(). As a result, a case such as [ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:0:5efe:255.255.255.255]:65535 is possible with the current formatter. That is 50 visible characters, so 51 bytes including the trailing NUL, which does not fit in the existing char[50] buffers used by net/rxrpc/proc.c. Size the buffers from the formatter's maximum textual form and switch the call sites to scnprintf(). Changes since v1: - correct the changelog to cite the actual maximum current-tree case explicitly - frame the proof around the ISATAP formatting path instead of the earlier mapped-v4 example (CVE-2026-31630)

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：netfilter: nft_set_rbtree: check for partial overlaps in anonymous sets Userspace provides an optimized representation in case intervals are adjacent, where the end element is omitted. The existing partial overlap detection logic skips anonymous set checks on start elements for this reason. However, it is possible to add intervals that overlap to this anonymous where two start elements with the same, eg. A-B, A-C where C < B. start end A B start end A C Restore the check on overlapping start elements to report an overlap. (CVE-2026-45873)

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：drm/amd/display: Bound VBIOS record-chain walk loops [Why & How] All record-chain walk loops in bios_parser.c and bios_parser2.c use for(;;) and only terminate on a 0xFF record_type sentinel or zero record_size. A malformed VBIOS image missing the terminator record causes unbounded iteration at probe time, potentially hundreds of thousands of iterations with record_size=1. In the final iterations near the BIOS image boundary, struct casts beyond the 2-byte header validated by GET_IMAGE can also read out of bounds. Cap all 14 record-chain walk loops to BIOS_MAX_NUM_RECORD (256) iterations. The atombios.h defines up to 22 distinct record types and atomfirmware.h has 13. Assuming an average of less than 10 records per type (which is reasonable since most are connector- based) 256 is a generous upper bound. (cherry picked from commit 95700a3d660287ed657d6892f7be9ffc0e294a93) (CVE-2026-53138)

請注意，Nessus 並未測試這些問題，而是僅依據應用程式自我報告的版本號碼作出判斷。

Rocky Linux 9.6 主機已安裝的套件會受到 TuxCare ALMALINUX9.6：CLSA-2026：1792445930 公告中提及的多個弱點影響。

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：virt: tdx-guest: Just leak decrypted memory on unrecoverable errors In CoCo VMs it is possible for the untrusted host to cause set_memory_decrypted() to fail such that an error is returned and the resulting memory is shared. Callers need to take care to handle these errors to avoid returning decrypted (shared) memory to the page allocator, which could lead to functional or security issues. Leak the decrypted memory when set_memory_decrypted() fails, and don't need to print an error since set_memory_decrypted() will call WARN_ONCE(). (CVE-2024-57793)

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：crypto: af_alg - zero initialize memory allocated via sock_kmalloc Several crypto user API contexts and requests allocated with sock_kmalloc() were left uninitialized, relying on callers to set fields explicitly. This resulted in the use of uninitialized data in certain error paths or when new fields are added in the future. The ACVP patches also contain two user-space interface files: algif_kpp.c and algif_akcipher.c. These too rely on proper initialization of their context structures. A particular issue has been observed with the newly added 'inflight' variable introduced in af_alg_ctx by commit: 67b164a871af (crypto: af_alg - Disallow multiple in-flight AIO requests) Because the context is not memset to zero after allocation, the inflight variable has contained garbage values. As a result, af_alg_alloc_areq() has incorrectly returned -EBUSY randomly when the garbage value was interpreted as true:
    https://github.com/gregkh/linux/blame/master/crypto/af_alg.c#L1209 The check directly tests ctx->inflight without explicitly comparing against true/false. Since inflight is only ever set to true or false later, an uninitialized value has triggered -EBUSY failures. Zero-initializing memory allocated with sock_kmalloc() ensures inflight and other fields start in a known state, removing random issues caused by uninitialized data. (CVE-2025-71113)

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：rxrpc: proc: size address buffers for %pISpc output The AF_RXRPC procfs helpers format local and remote socket addresses into fixed 50-byte stack buffers with %pISpc. That is too small for the longest current-tree IPv6-with-port form the formatter can produce. In lib/vsprintf.c, the compressed IPv6 path uses a dotted-quad tail not only for v4mapped addresses, but also for ISATAP addresses via ipv6_addr_is_isatap(). As a result, a case such as [ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:0:5efe:255.255.255.255]:65535 is possible with the current formatter. That is 50 visible characters, so 51 bytes including the trailing NUL, which does not fit in the existing char[50] buffers used by net/rxrpc/proc.c. Size the buffers from the formatter's maximum textual form and switch the call sites to scnprintf(). Changes since v1: - correct the changelog to cite the actual maximum current-tree case explicitly - frame the proof around the ISATAP formatting path instead of the earlier mapped-v4 example (CVE-2026-31630)

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：netfilter: nft_set_rbtree: check for partial overlaps in anonymous sets Userspace provides an optimized representation in case intervals are adjacent, where the end element is omitted. The existing partial overlap detection logic skips anonymous set checks on start elements for this reason. However, it is possible to add intervals that overlap to this anonymous where two start elements with the same, eg. A-B, A-C where C < B. start end A B start end A C Restore the check on overlapping start elements to report an overlap. (CVE-2026-45873)

  - 已解決 Linux 核心中的下列弱點：drm/amd/display: Bound VBIOS record-chain walk loops [Why & How] All record-chain walk loops in bios_parser.c and bios_parser2.c use for(;;) and only terminate on a 0xFF record_type sentinel or zero record_size. A malformed VBIOS image missing the terminator record causes unbounded iteration at probe time, potentially hundreds of thousands of iterations with record_size=1. In the final iterations near the BIOS image boundary, struct casts beyond the 2-byte header validated by GET_IMAGE can also read out of bounds. Cap all 14 record-chain walk loops to BIOS_MAX_NUM_RECORD (256) iterations. The atombios.h defines up to 22 distinct record types and atomfirmware.h has 13. Assuming an average of less than 10 records per type (which is reasonable since most are connector- based) 256 is a generous upper bound. (cherry picked from commit 95700a3d660287ed657d6892f7be9ffc0e294a93) (CVE-2026-53138)

請注意，Nessus 並未測試這些問題，而是僅依據應用程式自我報告的版本號碼作出判斷。

遠端 Debian 13 主機已安裝的套件會受到 dsa-6477 公告中提及的多個弱點影響。

    - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Debian安全公告 DSA-6477-1 security@debian.org https://www.debian.org/security/Salvatore Bonaccorso 2026 年 8 月 29 日 https://www.debian.org/security/faq
    - -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    套件：linux CVE ID： CVE-2025-40074 CVE-2026-64216 CVE-2026-64581 CVE-2026-74626 CVE-2026-74653 CVE-2026-74662 CVE-2026-80536 CVE-2026-80557 CVE-2026-80562 CVE-2026-80572 CVE-2026-80583 CVE-2026-80590 CVE-2026-80725

    在 Linux 核心中發現數個弱點，這些弱點可能會導致特權提升、拒絕服務或資訊洩漏。

    針對穩定的發行版本 (trixie)，已在第 6.12.107-1 版中修復這些問題。

    建議您升級 linux 套件。

    如需有關 linux 安全性狀態的詳細資訊，請參閱其安全追蹤頁面：
    https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/linux

    有關 Debian 安全公告、如何將這些更新套用至您的系統以及常見問題的詳細資訊，請參閱：https://www.debian.org/security/

    郵寄清單：debian-security-announce@lists.debian.org

Tenable 已直接從 Debian 安全公告擷取前置描述區塊。

請注意，Nessus 並未測試這些問題，而是僅依據應用程式自我報告的版本號碼作出判斷。

遠端 Debian 12 主機已安裝的套件會受到 dla-4788 公告中提及的多個弱點影響。

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Debian LTS 公告 DLA-4788-1 debian-lts@lists.debian.org https://www.debian.org/lts/security/Ben Hutchings 2026 年 9 月 19 日 https://wiki.debian.org/LTS-------------------------------------------------------------------------

    套件 ： linux-6.12 版本 ： 6.12.107-1~deb12u1 CVE ID ： CVE-2025-38525 CVE-2025-40054 CVE-2025-40074 CVE-2026-43197 CVE-2026-53092 CVE-2026-64017 CVE-2026-64216 CVE-2026-64581 CVE-2026-64586 CVE-2026-68082 CVE-2026-68118 CVE-2026-68132 CVE-2026-68138 CVE-2026-68159 CVE-2026-68166 CVE-2026-68169 CVE-2026-68198 CVE-2026-68253 CVE-2026-68254 CVE-2026-68264 CVE-2026-68266 CVE-2026-68267 CVE-2026-68273 CVE-2026-68276 CVE-2026-68322 CVE-2026-68367 CVE-2026-68431 CVE-2026-68451 CVE-2026-68452 CVE-2026-68480 CVE-2026-72111 CVE-2026-74440 CVE-2026-74441 CVE-2026-74442 CVE-2026-74443 CVE-2026-74444 CVE-2026-74445 CVE-2026-74446 CVE-2026-74447 CVE-2026-74448 CVE-2026-74450 CVE-2026-74451 CVE-2026-74452 CVE-2026-74453 CVE-2026-74454 CVE-2026-74455 CVE-2026-74456 CVE-2026-74457 CVE-2026-74458 CVE-2026-74459 CVE-2026-74460 CVE-2026-74461 CVE-2026-74463 CVE-2026-74464 CVE-2026-74465 CVE-2026-74467 CVE-2026-74468 CVE-2026-74469 CVE-2026-74470 CVE-2026-74471 CVE-2026-74472 CVE-2026-74473 CVE-2026-74474 CVE-2026-74475 CVE-2026-74476 CVE-2026-74478 CVE-2026-74479 CVE-2026-74480 CVE-2026-74481 CVE-2026-74482 CVE-2026-74483 CVE-2026-74484 CVE-2026-74485 CVE-2026-74487 CVE-2026-74488 CVE-2026-74490 CVE-2026-74492 CVE-2026-74493 CVE-2026-74494 CVE-2026-74495 CVE-2026-74497 CVE-2026-74498 CVE-2026-74499 CVE-2026-74500 CVE-2026-74501 CVE-2026-74502 CVE-2026-74503 CVE-2026-74504 CVE-2026-74505 CVE-2026-74507 CVE-2026-74508 CVE-2026-74509 CVE-2026-74510 CVE-2026-74512 CVE-2026-74514 CVE-2026-74515 CVE-2026-74516 CVE-2026-74517 CVE-2026-74518 CVE-2026-74519 CVE-2026-74522 CVE-2026-74523 CVE-2026-74524 CVE-2026-74525 CVE-2026-74531 CVE-2026-74532 CVE-2026-74535 CVE-2026-74536 CVE-2026-74540 CVE-2026-74541 CVE-2026-74543 CVE-2026-74545 CVE-2026-74546 CVE-2026-74547 CVE-2026-74548 CVE-2026-74549 CVE-2026-74550 CVE-2026-74551 CVE-2026-74552 CVE-2026-74553 CVE-2026-74555 CVE-2026-74556 CVE-2026-74557 CVE-2026-74563 CVE-2026-74564 CVE-2026-74565 CVE-2026-74566 CVE-2026-74567 CVE-2026-74569 CVE-2026-74572 CVE-2026-74574 CVE-2026-74575 CVE-2026-74576 CVE-2026-74577 CVE-2026-74579 CVE-2026-74580 CVE-2026-74581 CVE-2026-74582 CVE-2026-74583 CVE-2026-74585 CVE-2026-74586 CVE-2026-74587 CVE-2026-74588 CVE-2026-74589 CVE-2026-74590 CVE-2026-74592 CVE-2026-74594 CVE-2026-74595 CVE-2026-74597 CVE-2026-74598 CVE-2026-74599 CVE-2026-74601 CVE-2026-74602 CVE-2026-74603 CVE-2026-74604 CVE-2026-74606 CVE-2026-74607 CVE-2026-74608 CVE-2026-74609 CVE-2026-74610 CVE-2026-74612 CVE-2026-74613 CVE-2026-74614 CVE-2026-74615 CVE-2026-74616 CVE-2026-74618 CVE-2026-74619 CVE-2026-74620 CVE-2026-74621 CVE-2026-74622 CVE-2026-74623 CVE-2026-74624 CVE-2026-74625 CVE-2026-74626 CVE-2026-74628 CVE-2026-74630 CVE-2026-74631 CVE-2026-74632 CVE-2026-74634 CVE-2026-74635 CVE-2026-74636 CVE-2026-74637 CVE-2026-74641 CVE-2026-74644 CVE-2026-74646 CVE-2026-74647 CVE-2026-74648 CVE-2026-74649 CVE-2026-74650 CVE-2026-74651 CVE-2026-74653 CVE-2026-74654 CVE-2026-74655 CVE-2026-74656 CVE-2026-74657 CVE-2026-74658 CVE-2026-74659 CVE-2026-74660 CVE-2026-74661 CVE-2026-74662 CVE-2026-74663 CVE-2026-74664 CVE-2026-74665 CVE-2026-74666 CVE-2026-74667 CVE-2026-74668 CVE-2026-74669 CVE-2026-74670 CVE-2026-74671 CVE-2026-74672 CVE-2026-74673 CVE-2026-74675 CVE-2026-74676 CVE-2026-74677 CVE-2026-74678 CVE-2026-74679 CVE-2026-74680 CVE-2026-74682 CVE-2026-74683 CVE-2026-74684 CVE-2026-74685 CVE-2026-74688 CVE-2026-74689 CVE-2026-74691 CVE-2026-74692 CVE-2026-74693 CVE-2026-74694 CVE-2026-74696 CVE-2026-74700 CVE-2026-74701 CVE-2026-74704 CVE-2026-74705 CVE-2026-74710 CVE-2026-74712 CVE-2026-74714 CVE-2026-74717 CVE-2026-74718 CVE-2026-74719 CVE-2026-74720 CVE-2026-74722 CVE-2026-74724 CVE-2026-74725 CVE-2026-74726 CVE-2026-74730 CVE-2026-74732 CVE-2026-74736 CVE-2026-74737 CVE-2026-74739 CVE-2026-74740 CVE-2026-74742 CVE-2026-74743 CVE-2026-74744 CVE-2026-74746 CVE-2026-74748 CVE-2026-80522 CVE-2026-80525 CVE-2026-80526 CVE-2026-80527 CVE-2026-80528 CVE-2026-80529 CVE-2026-80530 CVE-2026-80531 CVE-2026-80532 CVE-2026-80533 CVE-2026-80534 CVE-2026-80535 CVE-2026-80536 CVE-2026-80539 CVE-2026-80540 CVE-2026-80541 CVE-2026-80547 CVE-2026-80548 CVE-2026-80549 CVE-2026-80550 CVE-2026-80551 CVE-2026-80552 CVE-2026-80553 CVE-2026-80554 CVE-2026-80555 CVE-2026-80556 CVE-2026-80557 CVE-2026-80558 CVE-2026-80559 CVE-2026-80560 CVE-2026-80561 CVE-2026-80562 CVE-2026-80563 CVE-2026-80565 CVE-2026-80566 CVE-2026-80567 CVE-2026-80568 CVE-2026-80569 CVE-2026-80570 CVE-2026-80572 CVE-2026-80573 CVE-2026-80574 CVE-2026-80575 CVE-2026-80576 CVE-2026-80577 CVE-2026-80578 CVE-2026-80583 CVE-2026-80584 CVE-2026-80585 CVE-2026-80586 CVE-2026-80587 CVE-2026-80589 CVE-2026-80590 CVE-2026-80678 CVE-2026-80679 CVE-2026-80680 CVE-2026-80681 CVE-2026-80684 CVE-2026-80686 CVE-2026-80689 CVE-2026-80691 CVE-2026-80694 CVE-2026-80695 CVE-2026-80696 CVE-2026-80700 CVE-2026-80702 CVE-2026-80703 CVE-2026-80704 CVE-2026-80706 CVE-2026-80707 CVE-2026-80708 CVE-2026-80709 CVE-2026-80710 CVE-2026-80711 CVE-2026-80714 CVE-2026-80715 CVE-2026-80716 CVE-2026-80717 CVE-2026-80718 CVE-2026-80722 CVE-2026-80723 CVE-2026-80725 CVE-2026-80726 CVE-2026-80727 CVE-2026-80728 CVE-2026-80730 CVE-2026-80731 CVE-2026-80732 CVE-2026-80733 CVE-2026-80736 CVE-2026-80737 CVE-2026-80739 CVE-2026-80742 CVE-2026-80743 CVE-2026-80744 CVE-2026-80749 CVE-2026-80752 CVE-2026-80754 CVE-2026-80756 CVE-2026-80757 CVE-2026-80759 CVE-2026-80763 CVE-2026-80764 CVE-2026-80765 CVE-2026-80767 CVE-2026-80770 CVE-2026-80771 CVE-2026-80772 CVE-2026-80779 CVE-2026-80781 CVE-2026-80782 CVE-2026-80784 CVE-2026-80788 CVE-2026-80789 CVE-2026-80790 CVE-2026-80791 CVE-2026-80792 CVE-2026-80793 CVE-2026-80794 CVE-2026-80795 CVE-2026-80797 CVE-2026-80798 CVE-2026-80799 CVE-2026-80800 CVE-2026-80801 CVE-2026-80802 CVE-2026-80803 CVE-2026-80805 CVE-2026-80808 CVE-2026-80809 CVE-2026-80812 CVE-2026-80814 CVE-2026-80815 CVE-2026-80819 CVE-2026-80820 CVE-2026-80823 CVE-2026-80887 CVE-2026-80888 CVE-2026-80889 CVE-2026-80890 CVE-2026-80891 CVE-2026-80892 CVE-2026-80893 CVE-2026-80894 CVE-2026-80901 CVE-2026-80902 CVE-2026-80903 CVE-2026-80904 CVE-2026-80906 CVE-2026-80907 CVE-2026-80908 CVE-2026-80909 CVE-2026-80910 CVE-2026-80911 CVE-2026-80912 CVE-2026-80913 CVE-2026-80915 CVE-2026-80916 CVE-2026-80917 CVE-2026-80918 Debian 錯誤 ： 1142912 1143545

    在 Linux 核心中發現數個弱點，這些弱點可能會導致特權提升、拒絕服務或資訊洩漏。

    對於 Debian 12 書蟲，這些問題已在 6.12.107-1~deb12u1 版本中修復。此更新還包括來自穩定更新 6.12.102-6.12.107的更多錯誤修復，並添加了 Alcor 讀卡器的驅動程序。

    我們建議您升級 linux-6.12 套件。

    有關 linux-6.12 的詳細安全性狀態，請參閱其安全性追蹤器頁面：
    https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/linux-6.12

    有關 Debian LTS 安全公告、如何將這些更新套用至您的系統以及常見問題的詳細資訊，請參閱：https://wiki.debian.org/LTSAttachment:signature.ascDescription: PGP 簽章

Tenable 已直接從 Debian 安全公告擷取前置描述區塊。

請注意，Nessus 並未測試這些問題，而是僅依據應用程式自我報告的版本號碼作出判斷。

ID	名稱	產品	系列	已發布	已更新	嚴重性
341561	Linux Distros 未修補弱點：CVE-2026-80725	Nessus	Misc.	2026/8/29	2026/10/23	critical
360912	AlmaLinux 9.2 [TuxCare] 安全性更新：bpftool / kernel / kernel-abi-stablelists / kernel-core / etc 多個弱點（ALMALINUX9.2：CLSA-2026：1789898700）	Nessus	Alma Linux Local Security Checks	2026/10/1	2026/10/1	high
343851	Debian dla-4777 ： ata-modules-6.1.0-52-armmp-di - 安全性更新	Nessus	Debian Local Security Checks	2026/9/8	2026/9/8	high
365279	Amazon Linux 2023：bpftool6.12、kernel6.12、kernel6.12-devel （ALAS2023-2026-3196）	Nessus	Amazon Linux Local Security Checks	2026/10/12	2026/10/22	medium
369490	AlmaLinux 9.6 [TuxCare] 安全性更新：kernel / kernel-64k / kernel-64k-core / kernel-64k-debug / etc 多個弱點（ALMALINUX9.6：CLSA-2026：1792445930）	Nessus	Alma Linux Local Security Checks	2026/10/21	2026/10/21	high
351016	Amazon Linux 2023：bpftool6.18、kernel6.18、kernel6.18-devel (ALAS2023-2026-3139)	Nessus	Amazon Linux Local Security Checks	2026/9/29	2026/10/8	critical
364137	Oracle Linux 10 / 9：Unbreakable Enterprise 核心 (ELSA-2026-500374)	Nessus	Oracle Linux Local Security Checks	2026/10/8	2026/10/8	high
369491	Rocky Linux 9.6 [TuxCare] 安全性更新：kernel / kernel-64k / kernel-64k-core / kernel-64k-debug / etc 多個漏洞（ALMALINUX9.6：CLSA-2026：1792445930）	Nessus	Rocky Linux Local Security Checks	2026/10/21	2026/10/21	high
341563	Debian dsa-6477 ： ata-modules-6.12.101+deb13-armmp-di - 安全性更新	Nessus	Debian Local Security Checks	2026/8/29	2026/9/7	critical
348574	Debian dla-4788 ： ata-modules-6.12.100+deb12-armmp-di - 安全性更新	Nessus	Debian Local Security Checks	2026/9/21	2026/9/21	medium
345814	Amazon Linux 2023：bpftool、kernel、kernel-devel (ALAS2023-2026-2143)	Nessus	Amazon Linux Local Security Checks	2026/9/14	2026/9/25	medium

偵測

搜尋 Plugin

critical

high

high

medium

high

critical

high

high

critical

medium

medium