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.
  • CIGARPoint your coding agent at the right lines and cut its token bill by about a third.

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.
  • Gauntlet benchmarkGuard tested with real coding agents: safe work runs, risky actions stop.

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 74506 afs fix uaf when sending a message
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

Get HOL Guard for your computer

HOL Guard is a free desktop app that watches what coding agents such as Claude Code, Codex and Cursor run, read and install, and asks you before anything risky happens.

  • Download for macOS
  • Windows download
  • Linux download

Free. macOS 13+ on Apple silicon, Windows x64, Linux AppImage. Other ways to install

Star HOL Guard on GitHub to download
Runs on
macOS 13 or later on Apple silicon, Windows x64 and Linux x86_64.
Price
Free. Paid plans add Guard Cloud for teams. See pricing
Where your data stays
On your computer. Guard Cloud is optional.
Token savings
58.6% to 61.5% fewer tokens across three coding agents in our CIGAR benchmark.

HOL

HOL builds open infrastructure for AI agents: HOL Guard, a directory of AI plugins and MCP servers, an AI agent registry and the open HCS standards.

  • GitHub (opens in a new tab)
  • X (Twitter) (opens in a new tab)
  • YouTube (opens in a new tab)
  • Telegram (opens in a new tab)

HOL Guard

  • What is HOL Guard
  • Features
  • Cut coding agent token costs (CIGAR)
  • Install Guard
  • Download the desktop app
  • Pricing
  • Guard for teams
  • Compare Guard
  • Release notes

Guard for your AI tool

  • Guard for Claude Code
  • Guard for Codex
  • Guard for Cursor
  • Guard for GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Guard for OpenCode
  • Guard for Pi and Oh My Pi
  • Guard for Hermes
  • Guard for OpenClaw
  • All supported AI tools

Research and security

  • Gauntlet: Guard tested with real agents
  • CIGAR token benchmark
  • Research
  • AI security hub
  • Security advisories
  • Active CVEs in AI tools
  • AI agent security guides
  • Extensions and coverage

Plugins and MCP servers

  • Browse AI plugins
  • New 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

AI agent registry

  • Best AI agents
  • Best ERC-8004 agents
  • Best Virtuals agents
  • Best A2A agents
  • Best x402 payable agents
  • Submit an ERC-8004 contract
  • Feature your agent

Developers

  • Guard docs
  • Documentation index
  • Developer hub
  • Registry API reference
  • OpenAPI spec
  • Registry OpenAPI spec
  • Run in Postman (opens in a new tab)
  • HCS standards

Company

  • About HOL
  • Blog
  • Contribute to HOL
  • Guard contributors
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Affiliate program
  • Contact

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Back to active CVEs
High · CVSS 7.8CVE-2026-74506

afs: Fix UAF when sending a messageCVE-2026-74506

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-74506 records a High severity (CVSS 7.8) vulnerability in afs: Fix UAF when sending a message. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps Linux/Linux (generic), 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 Aug 15, 2026Updated Oct 21, 2026Source checked Nov 14, 2026First seen by HOL Aug 15, 2026Material review Oct 21, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
High · CVSS 7.8
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
3 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 7.8. 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), Linux/Linux (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
Linux/Linuxgeneric>=e49c7b2f6de7ff81ca34c56e4eeb4fa740c099f2 <c0d3b81f703b2a9e37fe1347610a50cdf0078c27 || >=e49c7b2f6de7ff81ca34c56e4eeb4fa740c099f2 <daaa726b14fc3026a6b328614d312b698f62f391 || >=e49c7b2f6de7ff81ca34c56e4eeb4fa740c099f2 <4af1ec68d54b3871155914d584fb10669c41a861c0d3b81f703b2a9e37fe1347610a50cdf0078c27, daaa726b14fc3026a6b328614d312b698f62f391, 4af1ec68d54b3871155914d584fb10669c41a861
Linux/Linuxgeneric5.8Not reported
Linux/Linuxgeneric>=e49c7b2f6de7ff81ca34c56e4eeb4fa740c099f2 <cbb0d3da042c01082f40166fdc99bf1752db72be || >=e49c7b2f6de7ff81ca34c56e4eeb4fa740c099f2 <c0d3b81f703b2a9e37fe1347610a50cdf0078c27 || >=e49c7b2f6de7ff81ca34c56e4eeb4fa740c099f2 <daaa726b14fc3026a6b328614d312b698f62f391 || >=e49c7b2f6de7ff81ca34c56e4eeb4fa740c099f2 <4af1ec68d54b3871155914d584fb10669c41a861cbb0d3da042c01082f40166fdc99bf1752db72be, c0d3b81f703b2a9e37fe1347610a50cdf0078c27, daaa726b14fc3026a6b328614d312b698f62f391, 4af1ec68d54b3871155914d584fb10669c41a861

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for Linux/Linux, Linux/Linux, Linux/Linux.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update Linux/Linux to c0d3b81f703b2a9e37fe1347610a50cdf0078c27; Linux/Linux to cbb0d3da042c01082f40166fdc99bf1752db72be if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Aug 15, 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

    Aug 15, 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: afs: Fix UAF when sending a message In afs_make_call(), there's a race with async call reception and destruction. If a call is dispatched that doesn't have call->write_iter set (used to specify the data content for FS.StoreData), then the first rxrpc_kernel_send_data() will not set MSG_MORE in the msghdr. Once rxrpc_send_data() queues the last request packet, the response could come in at any time and cause the call to be completed and put. However, afs_make_call() will look at the call again to see it ->write_iter should be handled - something it's only allowed to do if it has its own ref on the call. Whilst this is the case for synchronous calls, it isn't true for async calls such as FS.FetchData. There's also a potential UAF in afs_make_call() in the event that an asynchronous call is being sent, but the call fails in some way (e.g. it gets aborted from the server). The problem there is that afs_make_call() tries to abort a call if the rxrpc send fails, but the asynchronous notification from rxrpc may have caused the afs_call to be torn down. generic/650 plays games with randomly taking CPUs offline, and can interject a significant delay such that the call is deallocated before afs_make_call() gets to check call->write_iter - and a UAF ensues (caught by KASAN). BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in afs_make_call+0x1c90/0x2210 [kafs] Read of size 8 at addr ffff888035e050e8 by task fsstress/1409 Fix this by making afs_make_op_call() give the op->call its own ref rather than transferring the caller's ref to it and then dropping the ref when afs_make_call() returns. This also means that the afs_make_call() func never loses its ref on the call now.

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 14, 2026
References
4 linked sources
Open source record