How to Fix CVE-2026-43026: netfilter: ctnetlink: zero expect NAT fields when CTA_EXPECT_NAT absent in Linux

By Sai Kiran Pandrala

Related fixes

Other vulnerabilities in the same area that are worth patching alongside this one:

• How to Fix CVE-2026-43324: Security Vulnerability in Linux — Security Vulnerability in Linux
• How to Fix CVE-2026-43305: Security Vulnerability in Linux — Security Vulnerability in Linux
• How to Fix CVE-2026-43025: netfilter: ctnetlink: ignore explicit helper on new expectations in Linux , netfilter: ctnetlink: ignore explicit helper on new expectations in Linux
• How to Fix CVE-2026-43293: Race Condition in Linux , Race Condition in Linux
• How to Fix CVE-2026-23343: Critical Vulnerability in Linux , Critical Vulnerability in Linux

Last verified: 2026-05-25

CVE-2026-43026 is a netfilter: ctnetlink: zero expect nat fields when cta_expect_nat absent in Linux Linux. Fix it by upgrading to 5.10.253, 5.15.203, 6.1.168, 6.6.134, 6.12.81, 6.18.22.

What is CVE-2026-43026?

CVE-2026-43026 is a netfilter: ctnetlink: zero expect nat fields when cta_expect_nat absent flaw in Linux Linux. The vendor has not published a verified CVSS metric at the time of writing. It is not currently listed in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.

From the source record: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

netfilter: ctnetlink: zero expect NAT fields when CTA_EXPECT_NAT absent

ctnetlink_alloc_expect() allocates expectations from a non-zeroing

slab cache via nf_ct_expect_alloc(). When CTA_EXPECT_NAT is not

present in the netlink message, saved_addr and saved_proto are

never initialized. Stale data from a previous slab occupant can

then be dumped to userspace by ctnetlink_exp_dump_expect(), which

checks these fields to decide whether to emit CTA_EXPECT_NAT.

The safe sibling nf_ct_expect_init(), used by the packet path,

explicitly zeroes these fields.

Zero saved_addr, saved_proto and dir in the else branch, guarded

by IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NF_NAT) since these fields only exist when

NAT is enabled.

Why it matters in practice: The blast radius depends on how the affected service is exposed. An internet-facing instance with no compensating controls is the highest-risk configuration.

Am I affected?

You are affected if your installation of Linux matches a version listed in the Affected row above.

# Debian/Ubuntu
dpkg -s linux | grep Version
# RHEL/Rocky
rpm -q linux

How to fix CVE-2026-43026

Apply the vendor patch. Target the build named in the Fixed in row above (5.10.253, 5.15.203, 6.1.168, 6.6.134, 6.12.81, 6.18.22). The runnable command set below covers the most common deployment patterns for Linux.

Ubuntu / Debian

sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install --only-upgrade linux
dpkg -s linux | grep Version

RHEL / CentOS / Rocky

sudo dnf upgrade linux -y
rpm -q linux

After applying the patch

1. Restart the service or device so the patched binary loads.
2. Confirm the running version matches the Fixed in row using the verification command below.
3. Rotate credentials and API keys that the affected service could access if the asset was exposed during the disclosure window.

If you can't patch immediately

Until the patch lands, narrow the attack surface with these runnable controls.

Restrict network exposure

Block public access to the affected service at the perimeter. Allow only trusted source IPs.

# Linux iptables: only allow trusted admin subnet
sudo iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -s 10.10.10.0/24 -j ACCEPT
sudo iptables -A INPUT -p tcp --dport 443 -j DROP
sudo iptables-save | sudo tee /etc/iptables/rules.v4

# Windows firewall: only allow trusted admin subnet on management port
New-NetFirewallRule -DisplayName "Restrict-Mgmt-Allow" -Direction Inbound -Action Allow `
  -RemoteAddress 10.10.10.0/24 -Protocol TCP -LocalPort 443
New-NetFirewallRule -DisplayName "Restrict-Mgmt-Deny"  -Direction Inbound -Action Block `
  -Protocol TCP -LocalPort 443

Mitigations are temporary. Apply the vendor patch as soon as a maintenance window opens.

How to verify the fix worked

Confirm the patched build is the one actually running.

# Debian/Ubuntu
dpkg -s linux | grep Version
# RHEL/Rocky
rpm -q linux

Expected: a version at or above 5.10.253, 5.15.203, 6.1.168, 6.6.134, 6.12.81, 6.18.22.

Also worth doing: pull recent log windows for indicators of compromise listed in the vendor advisory, and re-run an authenticated vulnerability scan with up-to-date signatures.

Frequently asked questions

Is CVE-2026-43026 being exploited in the wild?

As of 2026-05-25, CVE-2026-43026 is not listed in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. Watch the catalog and patch on a normal cadence; KEV status can change as exploitation evidence emerges.

What is the CVSS score for CVE-2026-43026?

A verified CVSS score is not listed in the public record for CVE-2026-43026. Check the vendor advisory and the NVD page for an updated metric.

What version fixes this?

Upgrade to 5.10.253, 5.15.203, 6.1.168, 6.6.134, 6.12.81, 6.18.22.

Will a WAF or IDS rule alone close this?

No. Network filters cut down opportunistic scans but they do not remove the flaw. The vendor patch is the only durable fix.

References

• Official vendor advisory: https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a5a89db6981a1ddf2314bf50cb49db5a3146185f
• NVD entry: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-43026
• CISA KEV catalog: https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog
• Additional reference: https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1c2ebdeff8d088a2e47ae25d7b38447249adace2
• Additional reference: https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a64b7bf84b4d5ea54218c5d374ec87fff9000f43
• Additional reference: https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2898080c054ea4d6ddfaaf21bbedbc229a9a8376
• Additional reference: https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/fd002ff2ea030cbfb0188a11b3c60ce7f84485f4

*Assembled from the official vendor advisory, the NVD record, and the CISA KEV listing on 2026-05-25. Always confirm against the vendor advisory before applying changes in production.*