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 99009 bluetooth rfcomm connect the session socket
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 © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Unknown severity · Source severity not reportedCVE-2026-99009

Bluetooth: RFCOMM: connect the session socket without rfcomm_mutexCVE-2026-99009

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-99009 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in Bluetooth: RFCOMM: connect the session socket without rfcomm_mutex. 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 Oct 23, 2026Updated Oct 23, 2026Source checked Oct 25, 2026First seen by HOL Oct 23, 2026Material review Oct 23, 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>=82425b14f0fb22e46cfddc56d6465570f5ed0ce6 <4dc3d5a004b8fd59f3c905631dbb18cb601b1b41 || >=1b7841ffad08e911e8c4b9470f3fa08423568940 <d2206e8c78be69d21d4f5343c3e99fbaeef41cbb || >=946d76db77ee5f922968ce558629ae47b381e3fc <cc7732b8549ecb6f02457edeb8db1f6d255e381c || >=fbf7961964a6e93360179f64712320ae9a1e9577 <f492de11b325446b0b11bc2eb86e1f546eaa61b6 || >=759c185d0bbdb131357408f50b8735e04ed3caff <ac022970e9fb0a5f7e7d1f6c8e104c1ed924dd1c || 62ce8b33eb238cf18c15207332fbdc26d858f592 || 3873f3449701b3dc98cba577923be6493598e7a1 || 7ded3264106418c6456ccceaafd9fda596ce12c3 || >=5.10.270 <5.11 || >=5.15.221 <5.16 || >=6.1.188 <6.24dc3d5a004b8fd59f3c905631dbb18cb601b1b41, d2206e8c78be69d21d4f5343c3e99fbaeef41cbb, cc7732b8549ecb6f02457edeb8db1f6d255e381c, f492de11b325446b0b11bc2eb86e1f546eaa61b6, ac022970e9fb0a5f7e7d1f6c8e104c1ed924dd1c, 5.11, 5.16, 6.2
Linux/Linuxgeneric>=6.6.157 <6.6.160 || >=6.12.109 <6.12.114 || >=6.18.50 <6.18.58 || >=7.2.4 <7.2.116.6.160, 6.12.114, 6.18.58, 7.2.11

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for Linux/Linux, Linux/Linux.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update Linux/Linux to 4dc3d5a004b8fd59f3c905631dbb18cb601b1b41; Linux/Linux to 6.6.160 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Oct 23, 2026

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

    Oct 23, 2026

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

    Oct 23, 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: Bluetooth: RFCOMM: connect the session socket without rfcomm_mutex An RFCOMM connect() issued while a BR/EDR link is being authenticated makes lockdep report a circular dependency, and the reported cycle is a real AB/BA between rfcomm_mutex and hdev->lock. rfcomm_security_cfm() is called from the HCI event path, which already holds hdev->lock: hci_rx_work() hci_event_packet() hci_cc_read_enc_key_size() [hdev->lock] hci_encrypt_cfm() [hci_cb_list_lock] rfcomm_security_cfm() [rfcomm_mutex] while an RFCOMM connect() from userspace takes the same two locks the other way round: rfcomm_sock_connect() rfcomm_dlc_open() [rfcomm_mutex] __rfcomm_dlc_open() rfcomm_session_create() kernel_connect() l2cap_sock_connect() l2cap_chan_connect() [hdev->lock] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected kworker/u131:1/1128 is trying to acquire lock: rfcomm_mutex, at: rfcomm_security_cfm+0x31/0x3e0 [rfcomm] but task is already holding lock: hci_cb_list_lock, at: hci_cc_read_enc_key_size+0x1d2/0xcc0 Chain exists of: rfcomm_mutex --> &hdev->lock --> hci_cb_list_lock hci_auth_complete_evt() and hci_encrypt_change_evt() reach the callback the same way. Both orders have to be seen in the same boot, which is why a BR/EDR connection alone is not enough to show it: a session set up by the remote side is created by rfcomm_accept_connection() in krfcommd, which calls kernel_accept() and never takes hdev->lock under rfcomm_mutex. Connecting a device that authenticates and encrypts the link and then calling connect() on an RFCOMM socket towards any address - the connect does not have to succeed, the order is recorded before the page timeout - reports it every time. Only the session socket has to be connected with the lock held, and it does not: nothing else can see the socket before it is put on the session list. So connect it first and take rfcomm_mutex afterwards, which removes the rfcomm_mutex -> hdev->lock order for good, rather than keeping the HCI event path out of rfcomm_mutex. rfcomm_session_create() becomes rfcomm_session_connect(), which returns the connected socket without touching the session list, and rfcomm_dlc_open() adds the session once it holds the lock again. If another opener added a session for the same pair while this socket was connecting, that session is used and this socket is dropped. __rfcomm_dlc_open() now takes the session it should use, and its state check runs after the lock is re-acquired, so a DLC that was opened or closed in the meantime is still handled. Over an existing ACL link the connection can complete before the session reaches the list, and the wakeup from the socket callback is then lost, so krfcommd is woken once the session is visible. Connecting without the lock opens a window in which the socket can be closed. The DLC is not on a session yet, so rfcomm_dlc_close() finds nothing to do and returns without touching it, and rfcomm_dlc_open() would then attach a DLC whose owner is gone. rfcomm_dlc_close() now marks such a DLC with RFCOMM_CLOSED, and rfcomm_dlc_open() checks the mark once it holds rfcomm_mutex again and drops the socket instead of attaching the DLC. The mark is cleared when an open starts, so a DLC that is reused is not affected. This covers both callers of rfcomm_dlc_open(), the socket and the tty layer.

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 25, 2026
References
5 linked sources
Open source record