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 23371 scheddeadline fix missing enqueuereplenish during
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
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • 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-2026-23371

sched/deadline: Fix missing ENQUEUE_REPLENISH during PI de-boostingCVE-2026-23371

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-23371 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in sched/deadline: Fix missing ENQUEUE_REPLENISH during PI de-boosting. 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 Mar 25, 2026Updated Oct 21, 2026Source checked Oct 21, 2026First seen by HOL Oct 21, 2026Material review Oct 21, 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>=2279f540ea7d05f22d2f0c4224319330228586bc <ce6253fe718811cceb3a0ae0dbf0a5941dea3eb6 || >=2279f540ea7d05f22d2f0c4224319330228586bc <65af3633caf195d397ec4c39f51ae7615bd5a627 || >=2279f540ea7d05f22d2f0c4224319330228586bc <0638bf16b7a73a2fe63624bd0d16d9fd904805c3 || >=2279f540ea7d05f22d2f0c4224319330228586bc <ba1c22924ddcc280672a2a06a9ca99ee3a1b92c3 || >=2279f540ea7d05f22d2f0c4224319330228586bc <d658686a1331db3bb108ca079d76deb3208ed949 || 3cc3d77dc541181f97f1dc96d2977ef8359fd760 || d2b65976bf1ae9d0d9dd5770cd01695559438309 || >=4.19.257 <4.20 || >=5.4.212 <5.5ce6253fe718811cceb3a0ae0dbf0a5941dea3eb6, 65af3633caf195d397ec4c39f51ae7615bd5a627, 0638bf16b7a73a2fe63624bd0d16d9fd904805c3, ba1c22924ddcc280672a2a06a9ca99ee3a1b92c3, d658686a1331db3bb108ca079d76deb3208ed949, 4.20, 5.5
Linux/Linuxgeneric5.10Not reported

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for Linux/Linux, Linux/Linux.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update Linux/Linux to ce6253fe718811cceb3a0ae0dbf0a5941dea3eb6 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Mar 25, 2026

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

    Oct 21, 2026

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

    Oct 21, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
  • 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: sched/deadline: Fix missing ENQUEUE_REPLENISH during PI de-boosting Running stress-ng --schedpolicy 0 on an RT kernel on a big machine might lead to the following WARNINGs (edited). sched: DL de-boosted task PID 22725: REPLENISH flag missing WARNING: CPU: 93 PID: 0 at kernel/sched/deadline.c:239 dequeue_task_dl+0x15c/0x1f8 ... (running_bw underflow) Call trace: dequeue_task_dl+0x15c/0x1f8 (P) dequeue_task+0x80/0x168 deactivate_task+0x24/0x50 push_dl_task+0x264/0x2e0 dl_task_timer+0x1b0/0x228 __hrtimer_run_queues+0x188/0x378 hrtimer_interrupt+0xfc/0x260 ... The problem is that when a SCHED_DEADLINE task (lock holder) is changed to a lower priority class via sched_setscheduler(), it may fail to properly inherit the parameters of potential DEADLINE donors if it didn't already inherit them in the past (shorter deadline than donor's at that time). This might lead to bandwidth accounting corruption, as enqueue_task_dl() won't recognize the lock holder as boosted. The scenario occurs when: 1. A DEADLINE task (donor) blocks on a PI mutex held by another DEADLINE task (holder), but the holder doesn't inherit parameters (e.g., it already has a shorter deadline) 2. sched_setscheduler() changes the holder from DEADLINE to a lower class while still holding the mutex 3. The holder should now inherit DEADLINE parameters from the donor and be enqueued with ENQUEUE_REPLENISH, but this doesn't happen Fix the issue by introducing __setscheduler_dl_pi(), which detects when a DEADLINE (proper or boosted) task gets setscheduled to a lower priority class. In case, the function makes the task inherit DEADLINE parameters of the donoer (pi_se) and sets ENQUEUE_REPLENISH flag to ensure proper bandwidth accounting during the next enqueue operation.

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
Oct 21, 2026
References
5 linked sources
Open source record