HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members
  • Sponsor HOL
  • Advertise with HOL

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorFund agreed research, implementation and shared testing through the HOL Partner Program.
  • AdvertiseCompare README logo placements, previews and monthly prices, or promote a plugin or extension.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 23200 ipv6 fix ecmp sibling count mismatch when
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Contribute to HOL
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Affiliate program
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright ยฉ 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Unknown severity ยท Source severity not reportedCVE-2026-23200

ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONFCVE-2026-23200

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-23200 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps Linux/Linux (generic), Linux/Linux (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published Feb 14, 2026Updated Nov 5, 2026Source checked Nov 5, 2026First seen by HOL Nov 5, 2026Material review Nov 5, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Unknown severitySource severity not reported
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
2 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Analysis status

Analysis pending evidence review

Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps Linux/Linux (generic), Linux/Linux (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
Linux/Linuxgeneric>=cb2b0caa8ca93cbe39177516669bf699c74f7041 <50b7c7a255858a85c4636a1e990ca04591153dca || >=03f642caab84bbfd138e74f671bb436186ea7e82 <d8143c54ceeba232dc8a13aa0afa14a44b371d93 || >=3e5b25da0b4109a3e063759735e6ec4236ea5a05 <b8ad2d53f706aeea833d23d45c0758398fede580 || >=f72514b3c5698e4b900b25345e09f9ed33123de6 <bbf4a17ad9ffc4e3d7ec13d73ecd59dea149ed25 || 61d88ea0f30c88e4ea98793594943aed8f1fc9ab || >=6.17.13 <6.1850b7c7a255858a85c4636a1e990ca04591153dca, d8143c54ceeba232dc8a13aa0afa14a44b371d93, b8ad2d53f706aeea833d23d45c0758398fede580, bbf4a17ad9ffc4e3d7ec13d73ecd59dea149ed25, 6.18
Linux/Linuxgeneric>=6.6.120 <6.6.124 || >=6.12.63 <6.12.70 || >=6.18.2 <6.18.106.6.124, 6.12.70, 6.18.10

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for Linux/Linux, Linux/Linux.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update Linux/Linux to 50b7c7a255858a85c4636a1e990ca04591153dca; Linux/Linux to 6.6.124 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Feb 14, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Nov 5, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Nov 5, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
Upstream source description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ipv6: Fix ECMP sibling count mismatch when clearing RTF_ADDRCONF syzbot reported a kernel BUG in fib6_add_rt2node() when adding an IPv6 route. [0] Commit f72514b3c569 ("ipv6: clear RA flags when adding a static route") introduced logic to clear RTF_ADDRCONF from existing routes when a static route with the same nexthop is added. However, this causes a problem when the existing route has a gateway. When RTF_ADDRCONF is cleared from a route that has a gateway, that route becomes eligible for ECMP, i.e. rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns true. The issue is that this route was never added to the fib6_siblings list. This leads to a mismatch between the following counts: - The sibling count computed by iterating fib6_next chain, which includes the newly ECMP-eligible route - The actual siblings in fib6_siblings list, which does not include that route When a subsequent ECMP route is added, fib6_add_rt2node() hits BUG_ON(sibling->fib6_nsiblings != rt->fib6_nsiblings) because the counts don't match. Fix this by only clearing RTF_ADDRCONF when the existing route does not have a gateway. Routes without a gateway cannot qualify for ECMP anyway (rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() requires fib_nh_gw_family), so clearing RTF_ADDRCONF on them is safe and matches the original intent of the commit. [0]: kernel BUG at net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN PTI CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 6010 Comm: syz.0.17 Not tainted syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/25/2025 RIP: 0010:fib6_add_rt2node+0x3433/0x3470 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1217 [...] Call Trace: <TASK> fib6_add+0x8da/0x18a0 net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c:1532 __ip6_ins_rt net/ipv6/route.c:1351 [inline] ip6_route_add+0xde/0x1b0 net/ipv6/route.c:3946 ipv6_route_ioctl+0x35c/0x480 net/ipv6/route.c:4571 inet6_ioctl+0x219/0x280 net/ipv6/af_inet6.c:577 sock_do_ioctl+0xdc/0x300 net/socket.c:1245 sock_ioctl+0x576/0x790 net/socket.c:1366 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:597 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl+0xfc/0x170 fs/ioctl.c:583 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline] do_syscall_64+0xfa/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Record context

Vulnerability class
Vulnerability
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
Not reported
Source
CVE List V5
Source checked
Nov 5, 2026
References
4 linked sources
Open source record