← Back
CWE-362

2,955 CVEs • Abstraction: Class • Likelihood of Exploit: Medium

Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')

The product contains a code sequence that can run concurrently with other code, and the code sequence requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence that is operating concurrently.

JSON object

Loading...

CVEs (2,955)

CVE
VENDORS
PRODUCTS
UPDATED
PUBLISHED
CVSS
1Google
1Chrome
Oct 23, 2026
Jul 30, 2026
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Race in Chrome for iOS in Google Chrome on iOS prior to 151.0.7922.72 allowed a remote attacker to perform UI spoofing via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
1Google
1Chrome
Oct 24, 2026
Jul 30, 2026
N/A· v4
4.2 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Race in Chrome for iOS in Google Chrome on iOS prior to 151.0.7922.72 allowed a remote attacker to inject arbitrary scripts or HTML (UXSS) via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)
1Google
1Chrome
Oct 24, 2026
Jul 30, 2026
N/A· v4
8.8 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Race in Skia in Google Chrome on Mac prior to 151.0.7922.72 allowed a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code inside a sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)
1Google
1Chrome
Oct 24, 2026
Jul 30, 2026
N/A· v4
9.6 CRITICAL· v3
N/A· v2
Race in Downloads in Google Chrome on Mac prior to 151.0.7922.72 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to potentially perform a sandbox escape via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security seve...Show more
Race in Downloads in Google Chrome on Mac prior to 151.0.7922.72 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to potentially perform a sandbox escape via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)Show less
1Google
1Chrome
Oct 24, 2026
Jul 30, 2026
N/A· v4
9.6 CRITICAL· v3
N/A· v2
Race in Downloads in Google Chrome on Mac prior to 151.0.7922.72 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to potentially perform a sandbox escape via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security seve...Show more
Race in Downloads in Google Chrome on Mac prior to 151.0.7922.72 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to potentially perform a sandbox escape via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)Show less
1Google
1Chrome
Oct 24, 2026
Jul 30, 2026
N/A· v4
7.8 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Race in Updater in Google Chrome on Mac prior to 151.0.7922.72 allowed a local attacker to perform OS-level privilege escalation via a malicious file. (Chromium security severity: Critical)
-
-
Oct 19, 2026
Jul 29, 2026
N/A· v4
7.8 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: posix-cpu-timers: Prevent UAF caused by non-leader exec() race Wongi and Jungwoo decoded and reported a non-leader exec() related race which can resul...Show more
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: posix-cpu-timers: Prevent UAF caused by non-leader exec() race Wongi and Jungwoo decoded and reported a non-leader exec() related race which can result in an UAF: sys_timer_delete() exec() posix_cpu_timer_del() // Observes old leader p = pid_task(pid, pid_type); de_thread() switch_leader(); release_task(old_leader) __exit_signal(old_leader) sighand = lock(old_leader, sighand); posix_cpu_timers*_exit(); sighand = lock_task_sighand(p) unhash_task(old_leader); sh = lock(p, sighand) old_leader->sighand = NULL; unlock(sighand); (p->sighand == NULL) unlock(sh) return NULL; // Returns without action if(!sighand) return 0; free_posix_timer(); This is "harmless" unless the deleted timer was armed and enqueued in p->signal because on exec() a TGID targeted timer is inherited. As sys_timer_delete() freed the underlying posix timer object run_posix_cpu_timers() or any timerqueue related add/delete operations on other timers will access the freed object's timerqueue node, which results in an UAF. There is a similar problem vs. posix_cpu_timer_set(). For regular posix timers it just transiently returns -ESRCH to user space, but for the use case in do_cpu_nanosleep() it's the same UAF just that the k_itimer is allocated on the stack. Also posix_cpu_timer_rearm() fails to rearm the timer, which means it stops to expire. While debating solutions Frederic pointed out another problem: posix_cpu_timer_del(tmr) __exit_signal(p) posix_cpu_timers*_exit(p); unhash_task(p); p->sighand = NULL; sh = lock_task_sighand(p) sighand = p->sighand; if (!sighand) return NULL; lock(sighand); if (!sh) WARN_ON_ONCE(timer_queued(tmr)); On weakly ordered architectures it is not guaranteed that posix_cpu_timer_del() will observe the stores in posix_cpu_timers*_exit() when p->sighand is observed as NULL, which means the WARN() can be a false positive. Solve these issues by: 1) Changing the store in __exit_signal() to smp_store_release(). 2) Adding a smp_acquire__after_ctrl_dep() into the !sighand path of lock_task_sighand(). 3) Creating a helper function for looking up the task and locking sighand which does not return when sighand == NULL. Instead it retries the task lookup and only if that fails it gives up. 4) Using that helper in the three affected functions. #1/#2 ensures that the reader side which observes sighand == NULL also observes all preceeding stores, i.e. the stores in posix_cpu_timers*_exit() and the ones in unhash_task(). #3 ensures that the above described non-leader exec() situation is handled gracefully. When the task lookup returns the old leader, but sighand == NULL then it retries. In the non-leader exec() case the subsequent task lookup will observe the new leader due to #1/#2. In normal exit() scenarios the subsequent lookup fails. When the task lookup fails, the function also checks whether the timer is still enqueued and issues a warning if that's the case. Unfortunately there is nothing which can be done about it, but as the task is already not longer visible the timer should not be accessed anymore. This check also requires memory ordering, which is not provided when the first lookup fails. To achieve that the check is preceeded by a smp_rmb() which pairs with the smp_wmb() in write_seqlock() in __exit_signal(). That ensures that the stores in posix_cpu_timers*_exit() are visible. The history of the non-leader exec() issue goes back to the early days of posix CPU timers, which stored a pointer to the group leader task in the timer. That obviously fails when a non-leader exec() switches the leader. commit e0a70217107e ("posix-cpu-timers: workaround to suppress the problems with mt exec") added a temporary workaround for that in 2010 which surv ---truncated---Show less
-
-
Jul 28, 2026
Jul 28, 2026
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
[This CNA information record relates to multiple CVEs; the text explains which aspects/vulnerabilities correspond to which CVE.] With the introduction of Grant Table v2 came the requirement to be able to switch between...Show more
[This CNA information record relates to multiple CVEs; the text explains which aspects/vulnerabilities correspond to which CVE.] With the introduction of Grant Table v2 came the requirement to be able to switch between versions. Switching from v1 to v2 reduces the number of valid grant references, as a bigger shared entry structure is then needed while the shared table doesn't change size. Switching from v2 back to v1 the status frames, which are separate in v2, go away. Code holding, but intermediately dropping and then re-acquiring the grant table lock, sometimes wrongly assumes that said properties wouldn't change across the window in time where the lock is not being held. The v1 -> v2 issue is CVE-2026-62435. The v2 -> v1 issue is CVE-2026-62436.Show less
-
-
Jul 28, 2026
Jul 28, 2026
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
[This CNA information record relates to multiple CVEs; the text explains which aspects/vulnerabilities correspond to which CVE.] With the introduction of Grant Table v2 came the requirement to be able to switch between...Show more
[This CNA information record relates to multiple CVEs; the text explains which aspects/vulnerabilities correspond to which CVE.] With the introduction of Grant Table v2 came the requirement to be able to switch between versions. Switching from v1 to v2 reduces the number of valid grant references, as a bigger shared entry structure is then needed while the shared table doesn't change size. Switching from v2 back to v1 the status frames, which are separate in v2, go away. Code holding, but intermediately dropping and then re-acquiring the grant table lock, sometimes wrongly assumes that said properties wouldn't change across the window in time where the lock is not being held. The v1 -> v2 issue is CVE-2026-62435. The v2 -> v1 issue is CVE-2026-62436.Show less
-
-
Jul 28, 2026
Jul 28, 2026
N/A· v4
7.3 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
The EVTCHNOP_expand_array hypercall checks for whether FIFO event channels are enabled, but without holding the correct lock. It can race with EVTCHNOP_reset, resulting in dereferencing a NULL pointer.
-
-
Jul 28, 2026
Jul 28, 2026
N/A· v4
7.5 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
Accesses to the CMOS memory contents are done using an indirect IO port pair. Therefore Xen needs to cache the guest chosen index, and one of the usages of the index didn't take the necessary locking to avoid concurrent...Show more
Accesses to the CMOS memory contents are done using an indirect IO port pair. Therefore Xen needs to cache the guest chosen index, and one of the usages of the index didn't take the necessary locking to avoid concurrent changes. As a result, a guest could change the index after it being checked, causing a subsequent out-of-bound read access to the contents of an array.Show less
-
-
Jul 28, 2026
Jul 28, 2026
N/A· v4
6.5 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
Accessing the vNUMA configuration data of a guest is still possible when domain destruction has already started. The cleaning up of that configuration information is not synchronized with its retrieval by a device model...Show more
Accessing the vNUMA configuration data of a guest is still possible when domain destruction has already started. The cleaning up of that configuration information is not synchronized with its retrieval by a device model controlling the guest.Show less
1Apple
5Ipados
Iphone OsMacos+2 more
Jul 28, 2026
Jul 27, 2026
N/A· v4
9.8 CRITICAL· v3
N/A· v2
A race condition was addressed with improved state handling. This issue is fixed in iOS 26.6 and iPadOS 26.6, macOS Tahoe 26.6, tvOS 26.6, watchOS 26.6. An app may be able to cause unexpected system termination.
1Apple
2Ipados
Iphone Os
Oct 24, 2026
Jul 27, 2026
N/A· v4
4.7 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
A race condition was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in iOS 18.7.10 and iPadOS 18.7.10, iOS 26.6 and iPadOS 26.6. An app may be able to modify protected parts of the file system.
1Apple
4Ipados
Iphone OsMacos+1 more
Jul 28, 2026
Jul 27, 2026
N/A· v4
9.8 CRITICAL· v3
N/A· v2
A race condition was addressed with improved state handling. This issue is fixed in iOS 26.6 and iPadOS 26.6, macOS Sequoia 15.7.8, macOS Sonoma 14.8.8, macOS Tahoe 26.6, watchOS 26.6. An app may be able to cause unexpec...Show more
A race condition was addressed with improved state handling. This issue is fixed in iOS 26.6 and iPadOS 26.6, macOS Sequoia 15.7.8, macOS Sonoma 14.8.8, macOS Tahoe 26.6, watchOS 26.6. An app may be able to cause unexpected system termination or write kernel memory.Show less
1Apple
1Macos
Oct 24, 2026
Jul 27, 2026
N/A· v4
4.7 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
A race condition was addressed with improved state handling. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.7.8, macOS Sonoma 14.8.8, macOS Tahoe 26.6. An app may be able to access sensitive user data.
1Apple
2Macos
Tvos
Jul 29, 2026
Jul 27, 2026
N/A· v4
4.7 MEDIUM· v3
N/A· v2
A race condition was addressed with additional validation. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.7.8, macOS Sonoma 14.8.8, macOS Tahoe 26.6, tvOS 26.6. An app may be able to access sensitive user data.
1Apple
1Macos
Oct 24, 2026
Jul 27, 2026
N/A· v4
7.0 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
A race condition was addressed with improved state management. This issue is fixed in macOS Sonoma 14.8.8, macOS Tahoe 26.6. An app may be able to gain root privileges.
1Apple
1Macos
Oct 24, 2026
Jul 27, 2026
N/A· v4
7.5 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
This issue was addressed through improved state management. This issue is fixed in macOS Tahoe 26.6. An attacker may be able to modify the state of the Keychain.
1Apple
1Macos
Oct 24, 2026
Jul 27, 2026
N/A· v4
7.0 HIGH· v3
N/A· v2
A race condition was addressed with improved state handling. This issue is fixed in macOS Sequoia 15.7.8, macOS Sonoma 14.8.8, macOS Tahoe 26.6. An app may be able to gain root privileges.